Voices on Female Deacons in the Stone-Campbell Movement

Possibly the most surprising discovery for contemporary members of Churches of Christ is that many early "restoration" writers took the work of female deacons nearly for granted. They simply assumed that a restoration church true to the New Testament "pattern" would have deaconesses or a female deacons. What follows is simply an anthology of "voices" from the past on the matter of female deacons.

These voices largely focus on the interpretation of two texts, Romans 16.1-2 and 1 Timothy 3.11. This anthology helps raise some thorny questions: How did the current consensus come about? Is the current consensus biblical or traditional? I will provide the name of the writer, the date of the writing and a location so you can read it for yourself should you be so inclined to do so.

Strange Voices ... to Our Ears

Alexander Campbell argued that the NT church had an "office" of deaconess. His understanding is reflected in his translation of Romans 16.1 and 1 Timothy 3.11 in the Living Oracles.

"I commend to you Phebe, our sister, who is a deaconess of the congregation at Cenchrea, that you receive her in the Lord ..." (Rom 16.1, Living Oracles)

"The women [not wives! BV] in like manner, must be grave, not slanderers ..." (1 Tim 3.11 Living Oracles).

In 1835 Campbell wrote, "From Rom 16:1 as well as from 1 Tm 3:11 it appears that females were constituted deaconesses in the primitive church. Duties to females as well as to males demand this" ("Order", MH 1835, p. 507). He would write 18 years later, "The primitive church had also deacons. Such was Phoebe, of Cenchrea" ("Church Organization #2" MH 1853, p. 185). Two more morsels from Campbell,

"Amongst the Greeks who paid so much regard to differences of sex, female deacons or deaconesses, were appointed to visit the sisters" (Restoration of the Ancient Order XIX, Christian Baptist, 1826, p. 4)

"I say it [the church] is an organized body. Its organs are pastors or teachers, deacons and deaconesses; and for foreign missions and influence, evangelists or missionaries" (Organization #3, MH 1853, p. 247)

Robert Richardson, a leading scholar of the movement and biographer of Alexander Campbell, wrote in 1836, "Doubtless showers of mercy and the distributors were deacons, while the deaconesses had for her peculiar department the care of the sick and indigent females and those duties which can be better and more appropriately performed by females" ("Order - No.3," MH [1836], 519).

Walter Scott the great evangelist and inventor of the Five Finger Plan of Salvation wrote in his journal The Evangelist.

"We could name a church in which the sisterhood is in the habit of assembling once a week at the house of the deaconesses to sew and make garments for the poor and needy; but to name the church is wholly unnecessary and it might be improper, as I mention it merely to recommend the charitable custom to the sisters of other churches, that they also may be fruitful in good works and adorn their holy profession by deeds of love and benevolence" ("Letters," Evangelist [1840], 72).

W. K. Pendleton was AC's son in law and professor at Bethany College as well as an editor of the Millennial Harbinger. He was very prominent among "us" in his day. In the following quote note his comments on how the "brethren" regard this ministry of female deacons. Here are two enlightening passages.

"In the discharge of this duty [care of the poor], there would be necessarily arise cases in which men could not with propriety act, especially in a country like the East where the social intercourse between the sexes was restricted by so many forms; and therefore, we find that into this order females introduced evidently by apostolic sanction. Paul ... speaks of Phoebe as a deaconess of the church in Cenchrea; ... and in the Epistle to Timothy 3:11,12, we interpret him as describing their qualifications for office ... It is generally regarded, among our brethren, as an essential element in the restoration of the primitive order, to ordain, in every church, both deacons and deaconesses" ("Discipline, No 5," MH [1848], 292).

"Besides deacons, every church should have deaconesses, whose duty it is to perform such offices as cannot be so well performed by deacons, and especially such to females, as could not with delicacy and propriety be laid upon the deacons" ("Deacons-Should the Church Have Them?" MH [1870], 54).

Robert Milligan was ordained by Thomas Campbell in 1842. He became a professor at Bethany in 1854 and would later become President of Kentucky University. Milligan is remembered for his classic The Scheme of Redemption and his Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. He was renowned as a scholar in his day. His voice on female deacons sounds like this

"The Diaconate of the primitive church was not confined to male members. Deaconesses were also appointed to attend to the wants of the sick and the needy, especially to their own sex ... The order was continued, in the Greek church, until the beginning of the thirteenth century, and it is to be regretted that it was ever discontinued in any church. The poor and the needy will always be with us, and will require the attention of both Deacons and Deaconesses just as much did the Churches of Jerusalem, Cenchrea and Ephesus" (Scheme of Redemption, p. 343. The mention of Ephesus indicates Milligan's understanding of 1 Tim 3.11f)

Tolbert Fanning was founding editor of the Gospel Advocate. His stance against the Missionary Society and the introduction of instrumental music played a key role in shaping attitudes throughout Churches of Christ in the 19th century. This giant of the Stone-Campbell Movement addressed the subject of female deacons several times.

"In the primitive churches there were also deaconesses, as Phoebe-the servant-deaconess in Cenchreae" ("Church Officers, No.3: Deacons," GA [1859], 83)

"The Sisters, beyond all question, were as legitimately deacons as the brethren. Paul said, "I commend to you Phoebe, our sister, who is a deacon/servant of the church at Cenchrea.' The Apostle, not only recommended the brethren at Rome to receive her as a deacon of her church as becomes saints, but to "assist her in whatsoever business she had need of them" ... The ministering to the Savior by these Galilean women (Mt 27:55) evinced the strongest faith and an earnestness of life seldom witnessed. They were deacons, or ministers, to Jesus Christ in the most expressive way" ("The Church of Christ in History, No. 8," Religious Historian [December 1873], 357)

Isaac Errett was the inheritor of the mantle of Alexander Campbell and editor of the Christian Standard. In 1873 he had opportunity to address texts in 1 Timothy (5:9ff) in this manner,

"The qualifications evidently point to a ministry involving the exercise of hospitatlity, the are of the afflicted, the training of children, and the instruction of younger women in the duties of life. Taking this as referring to deaconesses - and this seems to us the most reasonable interpretation - the text throws more light ont he duties of their ministry than any other in the New Testament. It does not follow that all deaconesses were necessarily widows but that among the widow supported by the church those possessing qualifications could be profitably employed in this office" ("Deaconesses," CS [7 June 1873], 188)

Moses Lard needs no introduction to those semi-familiar with our history. Lard is the one Campbell picked to defend the Movement against the attacks of Jeremiah Jeter, became editor of Lard's Quarterly, Apostolic Times and his learned Commentary on Romans as well as President of the College of the Bible. In his Commentary, published in 1875, he voices the following exegesis.

"Phoebe was a servant of the church in Cenchrea. This much is actually asserted. Was she appointed to the service by the church, or did she assume it of herself? The question is not material. For whether she assumed the service of her own accord or was appointed to it, she performed it with the Apostle's sanction. This stamps it right ... I am therefore of the opinion that Phoebe was a deaconess in the official sense of that word.

What special duties were of this order of women, it would seem not difficult to conjecture. There work consisted in serving the sisterhood ... In all churches there would be among the females, the poor, the sick, the untaught, the erring, the unfortunate. These would need attentions which no other persons could so delicately and successfully as the deaconesses ... Even in the present day, the deaconess should be re-established. They are often of as much importance to a church as the deacons, if not more." (Commentary on Romans, p. 451)

B. W. Johnson was a professor and author among latter 19th century Stone-Campbell Movement. He taught at Bethany for some time and later moved to Iowa. He was editor of the influential The Evangelist for 45 years. He authored commentaries on the Gospel of John and the Revelation. However, Johnson is best known for his popular The People's New Testament with Notes, vol 1 (1889) and vol 2 (1891). His voice on the lovely lady Phoebe carried this tune,

"I commend unto you Phoebe. Evidently the bearer of the letter [i.e Romans], a sister in Christ. In this list of persons greeted, a number are women, and the greetings show how highly Paul esteemed woman's work in the church. A servant. The word is deacon in the Greek. The world also means "servant" as rendered, but we know that there were deaconesses in the church of the first century, and Paul, in giving her a recommendation, no doubt mentions her office ... She hath been a succourer of many. This would result from her office as a deaconess. Among those ministered two was the apostle himself." (People's New Testament, Vol 2, p. 71)

J. M. Barnes writing in the Gospel Advocate in 1893 reports the findings of his study of 1 Timothy 3:8ff. Please note his comments about elders and deacons wives. In the 20th century many have suggested that Paul really is giving qualifications for both elders and deacons wives. Not so Barnes and most earlier interpreters.

"Was she not a diakonos different from the rank and file? It is obvious ... In this [the Diaconate] there were men and women. Does this surprise you? ... If this does not mean the women were among the deacons what is the apostles' doctrine on the subject? Why does the Holy Spirit give such specific instructions about the wives of deacons and not a word about the wives of elders? Why are the women put in here when wives of deacons are spoken of in the next verse?" ("Deacons," Gospel Advocate [19 January 1893], 43).

I. B. Grubbs, long time Professor at the College of the Bible, published his Commentary on Romans in 1913 (posthumously). The Commentary was noted for its grasp of Paul's doctrine of justification by faith and not by works. He has this to say on Romans 16.1-2 and Phoebe, "She was a deaconess in the church at Cenchrea. Her work seemed to have been that of ministering to the saints whenever they needed help" (Commentary on Romans, p. 174).

C. R. Nichol needs no introduction. A legendary debater, evangelist, and editor were among his many talents. He was a close associate of Foy Wallace, Jr and R. L. Whiteside (co-authoring Sound Doctrine with RLW). His name is synonymous with conservative, even legalistic, Christianity. Nichol, however, undertook the most extensive investigation of anyone, up to that time, in our brotherhood of women and their roles in the Bible. His study resulted in a remarkable and groundbreaking book for 20th century Churches of Christ published in 1938 entitled God's Woman. This book reveals Nichol as one who wrestles with the material and willingly embraces positions that are far from the norm by this time in the 20th century. Based upon his own study of God's word he came to the conclusion that women not only could but DID, pray in the presence of men, that women served as deacons, and that neither 1 Corinthians 14 or 1 Timothy 2 were "unlimited" proscriptions against women but were in context aimed at unruly wives. This book deserves to be digested.

Concluding Thoughts

This brief survey of voices shows that those very names that are so often referred to as "faithful and representative men" not only believed in female deacons but actively called for their restoration. This survey, by its very nature, is by no means exhaustive but it raises a number of questions. And it should generate questions, numerous questions, hard questions ... both about the restoration fathers and about ourselves.

Perhaps the first item we learn from this exercise is that the current "traditional" position is a relatively new comer on the block, and it is a current tradition! Perhaps the next, and most difficult, question has do with the culture issue that is so often thrown around. Why is it that these men, with no pressure from the ERA or the Women's Liberation Movement or Feminism or .. read these texts as they did? The opposite question also comes to mind, why have we so often arrived at a diametrically opposed reading of these texts ... and then we say only those who wish to sell out to culture come do a different conclusion than the now traditional interpretation. However, nearly the entire 19th century restoration tradition at least places a question mark by the now commonly assumed understanding. Perhaps we need to ask the question, "How has our own understanding of these texts been a reaction against certain emphases around us and not from exegesis itself?? Perhaps our "church culture" shifted under the wider world culture ... these questions are fair and worth reflecting upon. It is further worth reflecting upon this strange, and ironic, truth: the only deacon in the entire Bible that we know by name is a woman name Phoebe!

Read More

Seeking Asylum in the Savior: A Brief Review

I recently received a book titled Seeking Asylum in the Savior: The Road to the Cross is not a Cul-De-Sac from its author Steven Clark Goad. I want to begin this brief review by thanking Steven for his kindness for the book and also thank him for helping us to reflect on our Lord in a powerful way.

Seeking Asylum is a work of devotion in more ways than one. The work is devoted to helping Christians focus on Jesus in a more concentrated way and it is also attempting to help disciples become imitators of the one they confess. Steven is a great word smith and he paints some really moving pictures through the book.

Seeking Asylum is divided up into eight chapters: Our Awesome Savior; The Savior Who Blesses; The Savior Who Understands; The Savior Who Weeps; The Savior Who Creates; The Savior Who Smiles; The Savior Who Frowns; and The Savior Who Gives & Forgives. Each of these chapters is made up of short essays that sort of touch on the main theme in that chapter. If you are familiar with Jim McGuiggan's Jesus, Hero of My Soul the pattern is similar.

Some of the images are captivating, Steven has a spiritual gift for story-telling. I love verbal portrait of "my Lord with sawdust in his hair and calluses on his hands" (p. 22). Or picture of getting over our narcissism in "The Church of Goad" (pp. 124-126). Or evangelism as "one beggar telling another beggar where he found bread" (p. 186). Another short chapter that I have already referred to my classes is "What Kind of Church Is This, Anyway?" One of my favs in the book "Is it Ok to Ask Why" (pp. 96-99) is one every parent, Sunday school teacher and preacher needs to drink deeply from ... the Bible is literally filled with the question of "why." Steven is writing healthy stuff here.

I had only one "footnote" I added to the book and it came near the beginning. In an outstanding chapter, "The Power of the Resurrection" (pp. 30-32). Steven writes, "The power of the resurrection testifies that souls are saved!" For the record I am with Steven in calling attention to the fact that the resurrection of Jesus is absolutely central and needs more and more and more emphasis. We need to talk about the resurrection on more than Easter. Yet "salvation" is so often understood in Evangelical circles in terms that flirt with either neo-gnostic or platonic understandings. The resurrection of Jesus is promise from God that my own body will be saved not simply my soul. Paul speaks of "the redemption of our bodies" not the salvation of our souls in a Platonic sense (Romans 8.9-30, esp. v.23) The resurrection of Jesus is God's promise that he has not abandoned creation. Now Steven does not deny any of that. He statement just participates in a way of talking that encourages Christians to believe all that matters to God is something we cannot see ... and of course I know Steven does not believe that.

Overall I think Seeking Asylum in the Savior is a book that can help us do just that. Its memorable pictures and humorous way of commenting on the Christian life will help us steer clear of any journey stopping cul-de-sacs. I suggest the best way to encounter this book is not to simply read it all the way through in one setting. Rather I recommend reading one chapter a day with a friend or spouse and mull over the story. I believe by the end you will indeed find yourself finding a safe place with Jesus on the grand adventure we call discipleship ...

Shalom
Bobby Valentine

Read More

When Illusion Crumbles

This morning is the tenth anniversary of a day that we all recall in shock, disbelief, awe and even hope. It was the day when concrete and steel crumbled. It was the day when terror entered our lives. It was the day when a life of illusion came tumbling down. But it was also a day in which something truly divine took place. While the concrete and steel was on fire we witnessed unbelievable acts of heroism, self-sacrifice and a sense that the world is about more than getting, collecting, and “looking out for number one.”

What about you? What were you doing that morning? I recall that day vividly! I ran up to the school where my wife was teaching sixth grade and we all watched the news together. I recall trying to protect my two little girls from the ugliness of it all. I recall attending a prayer vigil that evening at Southside to pray, cry and heal. I recall the sense of anger, yes anger, that swept over me at the senselessness of it all. Yes I can even feel it still

But a lot has happened in the ten years since “9-11.” New presidents. New Congresses. New lives. People dying. People being born. The question that forces itself upon is “What has changed in our lives since the illusion crumbled?”

September 11 revealed and continues to reveal what really matters in this life. The illusion continues to claim to be real. Put your hope in stocks, bonds, money, … concrete and steel. But we all know that those things simply pale in significance to love, caring for our neighbor, recognizing our sense of togetherness, redeeming the moment we have with our loved ones. September 11 crashed the illusion that we call the shots, that we are in control, and that we determine our own destiny. On that day everyone knew it was time to pray and to lend a helping hand because it truly is not about looking out for ourselves.

On this day in which we will relive those events again lets not forget that life has moved on since then. Ask questions like: how has my life moved from the life of illusion to truly important matters? How has my life become more concerned about helping and sharing and less concerned with concrete and steel? Have we moved from the illusion that we still are in control and embraced true security by leaning on the One truly in control.

My life has changed in drastic ways since September 11, 2001. If you are like me you need constant reminders that the “Gospel of the World” is nothing but pure and even painful illusion. On this day remember the Gospel of Jesus Christ that gives hope, meaning, stability and courage in the face crumbling illusions.

Read More

The Greatest Books in Christian History

I recently read a list of what purported to be the 100 Greatest Christian books ... I was, frankly, surprised by many of the titles that were on the list. Conversely I was shocked by the absence of others. Out of the entire list not a single book dedicated to the "Old Testament" - the ghost of Marcion is still a poltergeist in the Protestant psyche. So I decided to make my own list.

Of course my list will be flawed too. I am sure some will scratch their head over a few selections. Yet what follow here are my selections for the 100 greatest Christian books of all time. I have tried to pick works that have impacted Christian thought and life in important ways ... and also works that have helped shape me personally even though I do not always agree completely with a given book. I would recommend to any Christian looking to build a library that these books deserve a place on their shelf (or kindle) ... but not only the shelf they deserve to be devoured. I have attempted to avoid what C. S. Lewis termed "chronological snobbery" but there may be more modern titles. I will offer an older title and then newer as my approach. I will offer the title with no justification for it.

1) The Apocrypha

2) J. B. Phillips, Your God is too Small

3) The Apostolic Fathers (ed. Michael Holmes)

4) Jacques Ellul, The Meaning of the City

5) Origen, Hexapola - now this work I do not have and does not exist as known today but if it shows up on Google books let me know

6) Martin Luther King, Jr, Letter from a Birmingham Jail

7) Justin, First and Second Apology

8) Oswald Chambers, My Utmost for His Highest

9) Irenaeus, Against Heresies

10) Walther Rauschenbusch, Christianity and the Social Crises

11) Tertullian, Apology

12) Albert Schweitzer, The Quest for the Historical Jesus

13) Eusebius, Church History

14) William Law, A Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life

15) Augustine, The Confessions

16) Augustine, City of God

17) G. Ernest Wright, God Who Acts

18) Bede, Ecclesiastical History of the English People

19) Alexander Heidel, The Babylonian Genesis

20) Athanasius, On the Incarnation of the Word of God

21) Jerome, The Vulgate

22) Richard Foster, The Celebration of Discipline

23) Gregory the Great, Pastoral Care

24) Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship

25) Bernard of Clairvaux, Sermons on the Song of Songs

26) Jacob Spener, Pia Desideria

27) Thomas a'Kempis, The Imitation of Christ

28) Francis of Assisi, The Writings of Francis of Assisi

29) C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity

30) Anselm, Cur Deus Homo

31) Dorothy Sayers, The Mind of the Maker

32) Erasmus, In Praise of Folly

33) Erasmus, Greek New Testament

34) Martin Luther, Selections from His Writings

35) William Tyndale, English New Testament, Old Testament (Pentateuch and Jonah)

36) William Tyndale, The Obedience of a Christian Man

37) N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God

38) Brother Lawrence, The Practice of the Presence of God

39) Adolf Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East

40) Teresa of Avila, Interior Castle

41) Walter Brueggemann, The Message of the Psalms

42) Thomas Campbell, The Declaration and Address

43) John Foxe, Foxes Book of Martyrs

44) John Bright, The Authority of the Old Testament

45) B. F. Westcott & F. J. A. Hort, Greek New Testament

46) Christopher J. H. Wright, The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible's Grand Narrative

47) Abraham J. Heschel, The Prophets (2 Vols). I know Heschel is a Jewish author but his work still ranks among the richest exposition of the biblical text.

48) Abraham J. Heschel, The Sabbath

49) John Bunyan, The Pilgrim's Progress

50) John Howard Yoder, The Politics of Jesus

51) Ronald M. Hals, Grace and Faith in the Old Testament (one of the finest little gems of a book I've ever read)

52) George Adam Smith, Historical Geography of the Holy Land

53) Frederick Buechner, Telling the Truth

54) William Wilberforce, Real Christianity

55) C. S. Lewis, Surprised by Joy

56) Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All its Worth

57) Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Life Together

58) The Desert Fathers

59) Martin Hengel, Crucifixion in the Ancient World

60) Gregory of Nyssa, The Life of Moses

61) Gordon D. Fee, God's Empowering Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul

62) Lancelot Andrewes, Private Devotions

63) F. F. Bruce, New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?

64) Rudolf Otto, The Idea of the Holy

65) Jonathan Edwards, Religious Affections

66) John Stott, The Cross of Christ

67) Watchman Nee, The Normal Christian Life

68) Lewis Smedes, The Art of Forgiving

69) Lesslie Newbigin, The Open Secret: An Introduction to the Theology of Mission

70) Bonaventure, The Life of St. Francis

71) Ray Bakke, The Urban Christian: Effective Ministry in Today's Urban World

72) Willard Harley, His Needs, Her Needs

73) Christopher J. H. Wright, Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament

74) Marva J. Dawn, A Royal 'Waste' of Time: The Splendor of Worshiping God and Being Church for the World

75) Terence Fretheim, The Suffering of God: An Old Testament Perspective

76) Gustaf Aulen, Christus Victor

77) F. F. Bruce, History of the Bible in English

78) T. S. Eliot, The Wasteland

79) T. S. Eliot, Four Quartets

80) Henri J. M. Nouwen, The Wounded Healer

81) John Donne, The Holy Sonnets

82) Michael Green, I Believe in the Holy Spirit

83) N. T. Wright, The New Testament and the People of God

84) John Goldingay, Old Testament Theology: Israel's Gospel

85) Gary Chapman, The Five Love Languages

86) Stanley Grenz, Created for Community

87) Malcolm Muggeridge, Jesus Rediscovered

88) C. S. Lewis, A Grief Observed

89) Marvin Wilson, Our Father Abraham: Jewish Roots of the Christian Faith

90) Mark A. Noll, America's God: From Jonathan Edwards to Abraham Lincoln

91) Robert Wolgemuth, She Calls Me Daddy

92) Helmut Thielicke, The Trouble with the Church: A Call to Renewal

93) Dallas Willard, Divine Conspiracy

94) Leonard Sweet, Postmodern Pilgrims

95) R. T. France, Jesus and the Old Testament

96) Richard Hays, The Moral Vision of the New Testament

97) Oswald Chambers, The Love of God

98) Richard Lischer, The Company of Preachers: Wisdom on Preaching, Augustine to the Present

99) Philip Yancy, Disappointment with God

100) Ronald J. Sider, Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger

There you have it. There are many more good books but these ones made the list today. If these are not the 100 Greatest books in Christian history they are at least one hundred books that have molded and shaped my own thinking and walking in profound ways. If you have not read these books I encourage you to get them and devour them. There is no book on this list I would not gladly read again ... in fact all (save Origen) have been frequented by me over the years. Some I like because I argue with them so much ...

Tolle lege,
Bobby Valentine

Read More

A High Touch Church: 20 Random Acts of Grace & Love

A High-Touch Church in A High-Tech World: 20 Random Acts of Grace and Love



1) Give love and support to a parent of teens

2) Rake a widows rocks

3) Take a single to lunch

4) Offer to keep a young mother’s children for a few hours so she can

have some personal time

5) Write a note of appreciation to an elder, deacon, Bible class teacher, or even the

preacher

6) Make an anonymous gift of $50 to a couple for a date

7) Visit someone in the hospital

8) Invite a visitor to sit with you

9) Invite a family over for snacks and games

10) Volunteer for the Giving Tree or other helping ministries

11) Host a teen event

12) Write a letter to a missionary

13) Pray daily for people in this church by name

14) Never let a visitor go unspoken to

15) Smile instead of frowning

16) Give love to those recovering from substance abuse

17) Offer to tutor a student struggling academically

18) Pick up the phone and call to tell someone that you love and

appreciate them

19) Share a good book with someone

20) Find the good and praise it



It is so incredibly easy to be a well-meaning dragon. It is so easy to tear down but it takes loving maturity to find the good and contribute to the good of the family of God.



"Finally, beloved, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is pleasing, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence and if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. Keep on doing the things that you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, and the God of SHALOM will be with you." (Philippians 4.8-9, NRSV)



Shalom,

Bobby Valentine

Read More

J.W. McGarvey's Evolving Relationship with Mk 16.9-20

J. W. McGarvey is widely regarded as the greatest scholar produced by the Stone Campbell Movement. As we continue to think about the ancestry and history of the King James Version I thought I would tie Stone Campbell history with that of the KJV. McGarvey was indeed a great scholar and one of his strengths was the ability to let fresh light change his mind on even important subjects. Briefly in this blog I will trace the "evolution" of his views on the ending of the Gospel of Mark. His "conclusion" of the matter in his commentary on Mark dating from 1875 (really became nothing but a point on the timeline), his visitation of the subject again in 1886 and then ten years later in 1896 (2x). Its should be fairly obvious that McGarvey softens and alters his original position in light of further evidence.

1875: Commentary on Matthew and Mark

McGarvey has an extended discussion on the ending of Mark in this commentary. He says "Our final conclusion, is that the passage in question is authentic in all its details, and that there is no reason to doubt that it was written by the same hand which indited [sic] the proceeding [sic] parts of this narrative. The objections which have been raised against it are better calculated to shake our confidence in Biblical Criticism than in the genuineness of this inestimable portion of the word of God." (p. 379).

McGarvey, in his Commentary, had made great efforts to disprove the work of British scholar Henry Alford (The Greek New Testament) who had made -- at the time -- the most persuasive arguments against Mark 16.9-20. At the end of his discussion McGarvey reveals that he had received John W. Burgon's The Last Twelve Verses of Mark. He cautiously recommends the book to his readers with this interesting caveat that Burgon tends to be "extravagant in many of his expressions, and often extreme in his conclusions." McGarvey’s endorsement of Burgon is hardly the wholesale or “over the top” like some of Burgon’s later fans. We will mention Burgon again below.

Also of interest is this interesting qualification that McGarvey make, especially in light of his rather confident "conclusion." He writes: "The authenticity of the passage being conceded, and the fact being apparent that it was written by some one who possessed of independent and correct sources of information, the question of its genuineness might be waived without detracting from its authority or credibility; for a true piece of history attached to Mark's book is not less valuable or authoritative because some other person than Mark may have been the author of it . . ."

Why make this qualification? Why separate authorship and authority?

1886: Evidences of Christianity

The eleven years after the publication of McGarvey's Commentary, were years filled with significant developments in the field of textual criticism. One of the most important was the publication of the 1881 Revised Version of the Bible and Westcott and Horts Greek New Testament and Introduction with the Appendix of variant readings. McGarvey briefly returned to the issue of the ending of Mark. He says, "The genuineness of these [Mk 16.9-20 & Jn 7.53-8.11] is doubted by some critics, though confidently defended, especially the former, by others. Further investigation will doubtless bring all to the same judgment concerning them" (Evidences, pp. 15-16).

In a lengthy footnote McGarvey pitted Hort's discussion against that of Frederick Scrivener (Introduction to the Critical Study of the New Testament). Scrivener, in McGarvey's view, has provided an "elaborate answer to all the arguments of Dr. Hort.” But McGarvey does not say anywhere where he comes down on the issue. Significantly, I think anyway, McGarvey makes no mention -- at all -- of Burgon's book that also tried to meet the arguments of Hort.

1896: Christian Standard

We are now twenty-one years after McGarvey's Commentary and his original conclusion. In the space of two months McGarvey visited the subject of Mark 16.9-20 two times (in his column "Biblical Criticism"). I quoted one of those in my earlier post that was questioned. By this time much more light had been shed on the subject than was available in 1875, and even in 1886. Significantly, McGarvey defers to Alford's opinion rather than his own (which recall he tried to refute in 1875):

"Yes, the statement is true; and it is true of more verses than the gentleman said; for the last twelve verses are absent from the Sinaitic and Vatican MSS., the two oldest now extant, both belonging to the fourth century. They are also absent from some later MSS., and in some others they appear in various forms. The question whether this negative evidence proves that the verses are not genuine, has excited much controversy among textual critics. Some contend that they have been accidentally lost from the few MSS. which have a gap here, while others contend that the original gospel did not contain them. I think the trend of opinion in recent years is in favor of the suggestion first made by Alford -- that the fragment was not originally part of Mark's Gospel but that it is an authentic piece of history appended by a contemporary writer. This would account for its absence from some MSS. and its presence in others." ("An Oft Repeated Question," Christian Standard 32 [1896], p.1239).

Immediately one thinks of the "qualification" McGarvey made originally in 1875 in his Commentary -- the historicity and authorship do not depend on coming from Mark's hand. Why is it that McGarvey does not come out as strong as he did in his Commentary? One can see that he has moved in his position regarding the Ending of Mark.

One month later, McGarvey received a question from C.H. Thompson concerning Mark 16.9-20 and Vaticanus. I will quote his reply:

"The question of the genuineness of these verses is one of the most intricate with which textual critics of the New Testament have to deal. At the close of my commentary on Mark, I attempted to set forth the principal evidence, pro and con, as it was known at the time of publication. Since then new light has been thrown upon the question, and the most elaborate discussion of it, in the light of them recently gained information, can be found in the appendix to the Greek text of Westcott and Hort. I think that, after a candid study of the evidence as a whole, it must be conceded that the question is as yet unsettled. It would be reckless to say that the passage is spurious; and it would be hazardous to affirm that these verses are certainly genuine. At the same time, I think it safe to say, as I did before, that the statements contained in them are authentic, whether written by Mark or appended by another hand." (Ending of Mark, Christian Standard 32 [1896], p. 1367).

This is certainly an "evolved" view from his "conclusion" at the end of his Commentary in 1875. He flatly states the question is unsettled and it is hazardous to affirm them as genuine. He returns to his position -- his "out" -- in his commentary. The information in 16.9-20 is accurate whether written by Mark or not. Why? Because the information is all paralleled in the other Gospels. Please note that Burgon is not even on the radar scope of McGarvey any more. In fact McGarvey says that the best discussion to be found is in Westcott and Hort commending that source. There is clear movement, by McGarvey, away from his confident conclusion of 1875.

One should note that the question has moved considerably since 1896. I would say two thirds of the info now available was not in 1896. The status of the versions has changed drastically since then, Burgon's claims about the Church Fathers has been disproved in study after study. Perhaps we can learn from McGarvey's willingness to amend his conclusion in light of further information.

A McGarvey Appendix from a letter I wrote several years ago:

Greetings Brother ... from the land of beer and cheese. Thank you for the copy of the article by Brother Wayne Jackson in the Carolina Christian about Baptism and Mark 16.9-20. I read the article. . . agreeing with some . . . disagreeing with some. My reply will be simply to a few short footnotes to the article.

Before I give my two footnotes on Jackson's article let me say that we should be able to present a biblically based, Christ-centered theology of both the form and function of baptism without recourse to Mark 16.9-20. Now just in case Brother Jackson sees this I confess that I do believe in baptism and Acts 2.38 (all of it). Now to the footnotes.

First the textual issue regarding Mark 16.9-20. Jackson cites J.W. McGarvey as a defender of the authenticity of the "Long Ending" of Mark. McGarvey's Commentary on Matthew and Mark was published in 1875 (if my memory serves) before the publication of Westcott and Hort's Greek NT. It was before the discovery of the Syriac MSS at St. Cathrine's in the Sinai Desert. It was before the discovery of many other evidences that suggest these verses are not authentic. McGarvey's commentary is about as out of date on textual issues as a book on the Solar System from the same period. That is not a put down just a simple fact.

However, McGarvey was an astute student of textual criticism and his views on the "long ending" of Mark went through considerable evolution after 1875. By 1896, writing in his column in the Christian Standard "Biblical Criticism," he indicates that Mark probably did not write verses 9-20. Today there are few scholars of any kind (including Churches of Christ) that accept the authenticity of these verses. There are actually four endings to this Gospel that are known. I would not base any "doctrine" on this text. We have nothing to fear from this. As Jackson says in his article (when he critiques A.T. Robertson) we should let "grammar" (i.e. the TEXT) determine our theology and not theology the text.

Second, it is most fascinating that Jackson uses McGarvey in the manner he did. Why? Because McGarvey did not believe that baptism (immersion) was absolutely, necessarily, essential to salvation on that glorious day of reckoning. He declared this very clearly in the Gospel Advocate in reaction to some he believed were taking extreme views on the issue,

"Dear Bro.:
Replying to yours of the 15th, I have no doubt there are pious persons who have never been immersed. It would be absurd and ridiculous to deny it in the face of what we see and know of thousands of persons living and dead who have exhibited self-sacrificing love of God and man, which puts to shame all common disciples. I have as little doubt that many unimmersed persons will be saved in the final day. It is not necessary in order to contend for scripture teaching on the subject of baptism to take the ground that God has tied his hands and put it out of his power to grant mercy to any who have been misled in regard to that ordinance. He has bound us, but he has not bound himself; except that he is bound to do what he has promised. He has not bound himself to do no more than he has promised. Don't injure the cause of truth by taking positions which rob God of the power to be merciful.

Yours fraternally,
J.W. McGarvey"

(Gospel Advocate [vol 37 [December 12, 1895], 790).

Now I wonder if McGarvey is one of those "apostate change agents" that Jackson was talking about “brother …” But I think McGarvey has some pretty wise words here. We do not have to become folks who rob God of mercy in order to present the biblical theology of baptism. Baptism is, after all, about God's mercy and grace -- to present it as otherwise is to present an untruth.

__________

Concluding Thoughts

I want to recommend an outstanding resource by my friend Stan Helton. Stan has done a yeoman's task sifting through nearly all the articles published on the textual issue of Mark 16 in the Stone Campbell Movement. See his article "Churches of Christ and Mark 16:9-20" in Restoration Quarterly 36 (1994): 33-52. I give him credit for first calling my attention to McGarvey's maturing views.

Read More

The Crucible of Worship: Reflecting on Psalm 116

A New Pair of Eyes

When I was 15; something happened that changed my life, I got my first pair of glasses! It was time to go down and get my drivers permit. I was excited and ready to take an exam. I hurriedly filled out the answers to the written test and I blew it away. Then that mean lady, you know her, made me sit down and take an eye exam! I stumbled and fumbled over letters trying to read them to her. I was confident I was not blind and did not need any thing attached to my face. Much to my consternation -- I failed! I had to go down and get glasses! I was shattered. I was humiliated! Here I expected to drive home in our ugly yellow/brown Dodge Cornet Station wagon home but instead I had to go get glasses!

We went down to the eye doctor a couple of days latter and I came away with a brand new pair of glasses. I hated admitting that I couldn't see well enough to drive without them. But when I put them on -- whoa! I could see! Those were leaves on the trees. The clouds were not just huge blobs in the sky, they had shapes and sizes. That night I went out to look at the stars and the night sky looked very different indeed. I could see four times as many stars as before -- so many in fact I lost my bearings and could not find where I wanted to go. I never knew all the good things I was missing out on simply because I didn't have glasses to see. Now I thank God for my glasses.

I have had similar experience in worshiping God. I grew up going to church, every Sunday and Wednesday. But the concept of `praising' God was as nebulous to me as those clouds without my glasses on. The thought of worshiping God, I was as blind to what that meant as I was the night sky which I thought I knew so well! I thought I worshipped the Almighty but I was just mouthing words that I didn't understand, and singing and praying to a God I did not really know!

I remember when I first failed my "praise exam"! I had been going to Bible college for three years so I should have known how to worship -- or so I thought! I baptized a lady and she wanted me to teach her how to praise God. I was dumb-founded! No one had ever asked me a question like that before. Well, just pray and sing . . . "go to church," was what I told her, but I knew that sounded hallow, and realized I myself did not know how to praise my God. I have, btw, failed my praise exam many times since then ...

I thought surely the Bible would tell me how to praise God. But I could find nothing that said: "This is how you are to praise God, here are three steps..." But I started to read the Book of Psalms (Book of Praises in Hebrew) and I discovered that these people knew how to praise God. As I read the book over and over I discovered that praise is not so much a routine or technique we go through but a matter of the heart. Worship, simply put, is a heart expressing love toward God.

Then I did begin to notice a “pattern” of sorts in the Psalms, however. There was not a flag that said here is step one or step two. But over and over certain concepts kept coming to the forefront of the Psalms. I want to share with you what I discovered in the Psalms. I want to share how different my world looked, so different that like the night sky I can say before I did not have the foggiest idea of what was really in the sky. Now God has given me glasses to see and those glasses are called the Book of Psalms. I discovered three basic components of praise in Psalms: 1) it is first a simple acknowledgement of WHO God is; 2) it is acknowledging what God has done; 3) acknowledging what he can do or will do in the present. We will see these themes in Psalm 116.

LIFE'S PAST CRISIS (116: 1-4)

I love the LORD, for he heard my voice; he heard my cry for mercy. Because he turned his ear to me, I will cull on him as long as I live.

The cords of death entangled me, the anguish of the grave came upon me; I was overcome by trouble and sorrow. Then I called an the name of the LORD: `O LORD, save me''

Our unnamed psalmist confesses to what we ourselves often confront -- the harsh realities of life. He describes his situation as being entangled in "cords of death," he was in "anguish of the grave" and "overcome by trouble and sorrow." Does any of that sound familiar? It does to me. I don't know if this person was deathly ill or under severe persecution. Bu whatever it was it was enough to cause anxiety in our psalmist.

The psalmist's exact situation may not be ours but I have been under similar burdens, haven't you? The struggle we all have over a loved ones illness or our own. Maybe financial hard times have come upon you and creditors are breathing dawn your neck terrorizing your existence. Maybe the IRS has decided to do an audit on you or your boss is on your case. Maybe your job is in the balance. Perhaps your family is falling apart. We have all been here with this psalmist.

For the psalmist it was this horrible experience that pushed him to call upon the LORD to act in his behalf. God have mercy on me, you know my situation. You know those seeking my life are liars, please deliver me! Lord you know the troubles in my life so "save me!" It is here that we see principle three in action, praise grows out of the belief that God will ACT on my behalf! I must believe that God is active in the world - without that I will never call on the name of the LORD. That leads us to the second section of this psalm.

GOD'S DEEDS ON BEHALF OF THE PSALMIST (116.5-11)

The LORD is gracious and righteous; our God is full of compassion. The LORD protects the simple hearted when I was in great need, he saved me. Be at rest once more, O my soul, for the LORD has been good to you.

For you, O LORD have delivered my soul from death, my eyes from tears, my feet from stumbling, that I may walk before the LORD an the land of the living.
I believed; therefore I said, "I am greatly afflicted." And in my dismay I said, "All men are liars.

Before I got my spiritual glasses (which hardly gives me 20-20 vision by the way!) I thought praise was just a matter of singing. Nothing could be further from the truth! Praise is dependent upon knowing God, and not just facts knowing God but knowing him accurately I praise him because I KNOW him. If I do not know him I am just mouthing words that get no higher than the ceiling.

Throughout the whole Bible, but especially in Psalms, God's people come to know him through his actions. Even in the NT when John the Baptist is sitting in prison wondering if he made a mistake about Jesus, he sent his disciples to ask Christ "are you the one?" Jesus did not respond by quoting prophecies or give a list of his divine attributes. The Savior said:

Go back and report to John what you heat, and see: the blind receive sight, the the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised., and the good news is preached to the poor (Mt. 11:4-5).

Jesus wanted John to draw his own conclusions about his messiahship on the basis of what he DID!! Actions speak louder than words we always are told, well God has given us a plethora of action to determine if he is a faithful and trustworthy God. In the Hebrew Scriptures in God says in essence: look at my record, it speaks for itself, now you draw your conclusions about me from that record.

Hebrew saints did just that. Again and again in Psalms believers refer to that marvelous experience of crossing the Reed Sea and they use it as a rallying point of experience to encourage themselves and others -- if God could do that, then surely he can do wonders now in the present!

This is absolutely fundamental to praise. Our psalmist believed God could and would act -- and he did. He KNOWS the Lord because he has experienced the Lord. Yahweh delivered him and he praises him for a concrete personal deliverance. That is the crucible of praise! Listen to the psalmist: "the LORD is gracious and righteous . . . full of compassion. The LORD protects the simple hearted..." The minstrel alludes to Exodus 34.6: Yahweh is gracious. How did the psalmist know that? He knows because he himself has experienced the grace of God first hand: "when I was in need, he saved me!” Praise grows out of that intimate personal knowledge of God. Who has God delivered? ME! Based an the accurate knowledge that God delivers, the psalmist can calm his troubled spirit; "be at rest once more, O my soul" Why, because God has been, active in his life.

Did you notice those extremely significant words in verse 10. "I believed; therefore I said, 'I cam greatly afflicted.” What did the psalmist believe? He believed that God would act. He believed in the God who had proven himself as trustworthy! His faith in God drove him to praise & prayer. This gives us a big clue to the crucible of worship. Worship are a response to the mighty deeds God has worked in the context of our own lives.

How can I put my spiritual glasses on so I can see the mighty acts of God in my life? The best way to do that is to do what the psalmist did -¬ keep a list of victories that God brings. David kept one: he knew how many lions and bears Yahweh had delivered him from so when he met Goliath he knew God would give him the victory. The Israelites praised God for the Exodus and her deliverance; we must acknowledge the Egypts, Babylons and bears that God has defeated in our lives. When you pray, keep a list and date the request, then come back and put the date of the answer. Listen to other Christians prayer requests, ask them about times when there could be no doubt God was watching faithfully over them. When you are troubled and a Scripture suddenly speaks to you -- it seems as if God put it in there just for you -- mark it down in on your list. Your Bible will be knitted together with the threads of your life, they become the fragrance of praise.


HOW CAN I REPAY THE LORD (116.12-19)

How can I repay the LORD for all his goodness to me?

I will lift up the cup of salvation and call on the name of the LORD. ? will fulfill my vows to the LORD in the presence of all his people.

Precious in the sight of the LORD is the death of his saints. O LORD, truly I am your servant, the son of your maidservant; you have freed me from my chains"

I will sacrifice a thank offering to you and call on the name of the LORD. I will fulfill my vows to the LORD in the presence of all his people, in the courts of the house Of the LORD -- in your midst, O Jerusalem

Praise the LORD."

Once we start seeing the world with our new glasses and we see how gracious our Lord really is toward us, we realize how inadequate any praise from our lips must be. I can never repay the Lord for what he has done in the past nor for what he is doing in the present. The psalmist realizes this. The best he can do is fulfill his vows to the Lord. He will lift up the cup of salvation, which is part of the thanksgiving offering and praise Yahweh as best he can. His true intimate knowledge of God convinces him how inadequate his attempts at praise really are; but it is from his heart and he means every word of praise offered to God. That is why it is a sweet sacrifice to the Lord. The rest of the psalmist's life will be spent in praise to God for what he has done (v.1)

Do we have any vows we need to keep before the gracious God of heaven? You made a vow when you were baptized didn't you? You vowed before heaven that you were making Jesus the Lord of your life! Does that vow need a little attention? I vowed I would give him my heart for allowing his Son to die for me, have I? Am I fulfilling my vows to God? My praise flows out of these. If I am not seeking to honor him, and to know him intimately then how can I really praise him. The words I sing out of the song book are someone else’s praise. They become mine when I can say these words represent the knowledge that God has been active in my own life. It is my praise when I say with our psalmist "how can I repay the LORD ;or his goodness to me?" Before I can say that I must know that he has been very good to me!

CONCLUSION

The daily deliverances in our become the crucible of praise. The little things that happen day in and day out -- keep track of them and praise God for them! Think of the bad times in your life -- did God see you through them? Have you thanked him for his grace in those situations, or did he rescue you and you forget to acknowledge it was He who delivered you? I must confess that I have frequently forgotten . . .

Read More