Comments on: What’s Up with Phebe?

By: Ross Geddes

Ross Geddes — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 20:41:16 +0000

Concerning Paul’s role, I read something by George Q. Cannon not long ago that sort of surprised me. So, for the opinion of at least one big-A apostle, here it is:

“There is an amount of deference paid to the writings of Paul at the present time which he possibly never anticipated would be when he penned them, or he might have written differently on some points; that is, if we accept the present version of his writings as not very, very incorrect. With his contemporaries they did not weigh so very much. Even among his brethren and the Saints–though they, doubtless, attached far more value to them than anybody else–they did not receive the consideration which the writings of others obtained, who are considered now-a-days his inferiors. He either wrote more than many of his brethren, or what he did write was much better preserved than their writings, and posterity have therefore assigned him a preeminence among his brethren which, when alive, he did not possess.” (6 August 1863; in Gospel Truth, ed. Newquist, p. 446)

On another occasion he wrote that Paul was “himself an Apostle, though not one of the Twelve” (12 July 1856; ibid., p. 195)

By: bookslinger

bookslinger — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 18:51:05 +0000

I don’t know the source, but I’ve heard several times from LDS scholards that Joseph Smith received at least one visit from Paul, and others that are not mentioned in modern canon. JS described Paul’s appearance and his voice. I don’t believe that resurrected beings visit prophets just for social visits. Therefore, I would say that Paul did play some kind of role in the restoration as a teacher or messenger to Joseph Smith. Just not as big a role as those mentioned in canonized scripture.

By: HP

HP — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 18:10:08 +0000

I meant that I am not sure that the freedom you describe women enjoying in the Greco-Roman world extended to, say, Hannah in Yavnah or someone similar. In areas where Greek education wasn’t highly regarded, I don’t know that you would find those attitudes.

By: TrailerTrash

TrailerTrash — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 15:20:41 +0000

Just a follow up on comment 21. I have completed the promised post on Paul at http://urbanmormonism.blogspot.com

By: TrailerTrash

TrailerTrash — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 04:03:56 +0000

HP,
What do you mean?

By: HP

HP — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 22:26:16 +0000

That is, of course, dependent on the society in question. I don’t think that we can universally expect women in the ancient world enjoying Greco-Roman freedom.

By: Matt W.

Matt W. — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 20:17:53 +0000

When I was taking my New Testement Class at Indiana University, there was mentioned a man who was addressed by Paul in one of the letters, but my professor said he was actually a woman. I don’t have my bible in front of me, otherwise, I would look it up. I think it has since been debunked, but am not sure…

By: TrailerTrash

TrailerTrash — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 20:16:38 +0000

Rosalynde,
If I may be so bold, based on your description it appears that Greco-Roman antiquity was much less patriarchal than early modern England. I don’t mean to minimize the oppresive discourse of ancient patriarchy, and many groups of Christians do appear to be more forward thinking on the issue of gender roles than thier typical neighbors, but I would suggest that at this early period Lydia, Prisca, Phebe and others were typical women. We know that women joined social clubs, the same ones as men. Inscriptions show them active in commerce. Many of the philosophical schools admitted women. Additionally, women were active in many of the religious cults, and some were restricted to women alone. All this is to say that women were not invisible or confined to the household in antiquity.

By: Julie M. Smith

Julie M. Smith — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 20:01:37 +0000

Rosalynde, I like your concept of “pockets of freedom.” In the canon, for early Christianity, we have:

(1) Phebe, for whatever reason
(2) Lydia, apparently wealthy as a seller of purple dye
(3) Prisca/Priscilla, who worked with her husband as a tent maker
(4) the whore of Babylon, drunk on the wealth of . . . oh, wait, scratch that

Anyway, I’m not sure what kind of conclusions we could draw from what is likely an unrepresentative sample, except for the usual boring one that wealth buys freedom. (Luke 8:1-3 and, of course, the anointing women are interesting data points from Jesus life).

By: Rosalynde Welch

Rosalynde Welch — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 19:13:44 +0000

Thanks, Julie and TT and HP, for your answers. I’m always interested in the ways that the overlap of particular subject positions embedded in particular structural conditions can produce moments of freedom for particular women, or particular classes of women. In my period, early modern England, the patronage system that shaped the Elizabethan court and other regional noble courts allowed some women a great deal of independence and opportunity. Middling and serving class Crypto-Catholic women also enjoyed a certain amount of religions freedom and autonomy, mostly because they had so little to lose: when you don’t enjoy any of the benefits of public identity anyway, the threats of house arrest and losing title aren’t especially frightening!

It sounds like we simply don’t know enough about Phebe in particular and conditions generally in early Christian communities to figure out if and how similar pockets of freedom might have been produced.