Widows & Elders - 1 Timothy 5

5:1-8 - Continuing in his instruction of Timothy on how to properly govern the congregation he’s been assigned, Paul counsels Timothy to treat “elders” like a father, and young men as brethren, “elder women as mothers; the younger as sisters.” We know that Timothy is young and while Paul doesn’t want him to focus on that as a shortcoming, he’s also giving him practical advice in how to treat people so they can come to respect his authority. He continues, “honour widows that are widows indeed.” The description of “widows indeed” is interesting because really there’s only one definition of widow and that is of a woman whose husband has died. I can’t really think of very many circumstances in which a woman is a widow, but not really. The article on this chapter from gospeldoctrine.com says, “Paul distinguishes widows who are ‘widows indeed’ meaning that after the loss of their husband, they have turned unto the Lord for emotional and spiritual support.” So the “indeed” part might be referring to women who are widowed but haven’t remarried or who are alone and living their covenants. Paul contrasts this “widow indeed” with a widow “that liveth in pleasure,” which I take to referring to those who are newly single and living an unchaste life. For the widow, they are to be cared for by her “children or nephews” which is cross-referenced with “grandchildren.” A widow who is “desolate” but “trusteth in God, and continueth in supplications and prayers night and day” is to be cared for by the church. Anyone who “provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.” We are commanded to take care of our aged family members as much as they are in need of help, but this can be a tough calling sometimes because parents aren’t always nice and taking care of them can feel like generosity they don’t deserve and sometimes they bring a negative energy and attitude into your home. And sometimes their needs are just more than a family can handle. Now that people are living longer lives, they usually need significant end of life care that is both exhausting and expensive. So I guess there needs to be a balance between taking care of your family responsibilities and allowing yourself to be abused or burned out. I’ve seen many families who are taking care of their elderly parents, in fact much of my generation is starting to do that. The strain on the family and usually the one individual person who is providing the majority of their care is unbelievable. This advise was given when people died younger and more suddenly. I’m not saying that this shouldn’t be followed today because it absolutely should, but it is a more complex issue than it was previously and needs to be evaluated with the Holy Ghost to make sure that we are doing it right. 5:9-12 - There’s some interesting wording in verse 9 in which Paul says, “Let not a widow be taken into the number under threescore years old, having been the wife of one man.” The IM seems to understand that the phrase “taken into the number” means being put on the church’s welfare rolls. The NLT of this verse translates as “A widow who is put on the list for support must be a woman who is at least sixty years old and was faithful to her husband.” This makes sense because younger widows would have more options are far as remarriage opportunities go, I would imagine. In fact, Paul seems to say just that in verse 11 saying, “but the younger widows refuse: for when they have begun to wax wanton against Christ, they will marry.” The NIV translates to say, “No widow my be put on the list of widows unless she is over sixty, has been faithful to her husband, and is well known for her good deeds, such as bringing up children, showing hospitality, washing the feet of the Lord’s people, helping those in trouble and devoting herself to all kinds of good deeds.” There seems to be a rebuke of young widows though, and I wonder if it’s just a social condition that Paul has observed over his lifetime or what exactly he is saying but the NIV says, “as for younger widows, do not put them on such a list. For when their sensual desires overcome their dedication to Christ, they want to marry.” This seems to contradict the earlier teaching that marriage is ordained of God because here it seems to be implied that marriage is what people do when they can’t be faithful enough to Christ. I wonder if he means because maybe the pool of eligible bachelors was so small within the church that the young widows would marry outside of the church and leave their faith. That would make sense with what he’s saying here. It’s interesting that Paul is demonizing women’s sexuality but not that of unmarried or widowed men. I wonder if it’s just implied that men will remarry, I don’t know. And I want to add that I think Paul himself is in fact a widower at this point and has been for the entirety of his converted life, so whatever commentary he’s making is also reflected upon him as well. 5:13-16 - For young widows Paul says that they become “idle, wandering about from house to house; and not only idle, but tattlers also and busybodies, speaking things which they ought not.” I don’t know if Paul is saying that this is a trait of all young women that is inherent to them and therefore unworthy of assistance or if he’s saying that young women who are cared for through church assistance tend to become idle and gossipy. Maybe it’s a commentary on the natural human response to not having to exert effort for your own support. I mean people have to fill their time and curiosities with something and if it’s not ensuring their own livelihood, then it’s got to be something else. Therefore, Paul recommends that young widows remarry, have children, and “guide the house.” I just realized that maybe Paul is only talking about widows because widowers (men) aren’t automatically qualified for family or church support. Maybe it’s because men usually die younger, especially anciently, so many didn’t make it to old age anyway and then if they did, they were still legally allowed to hold property and assets so their future is less tenuous. Surely if there was an elderly man in need the church would care for him but maybe those cases are so few and far between that it didn’t warrant a church policy. Because according to Paul, any believer “let them relieve them, and not let the church be charged; that it may relieve them that are widows indeed.” Here’s that “indeed” word again, but here it seems to imply widows “who are truly alone and destitute with no one to care for them.” 5:17-22 - Those who are helping Timothy run the church in his area are “worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.” I think that this should go without saying because working in the ministry, man or woman, is a taxing endeavor and should be appreciated by those they serve. But apparently it was a problem because Paul counseled “For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn.” Wait, what? This must have been something that was understood back in Paul’s day but I have no idea what he’s saying now. The article quotes Hugh Nibley as giving some insight saying, “the beast is working for you- give him a break,” which I take to mean that those in the ministry with Timothy should be given respect for their service and willingness to do the work, even if that work has room for improvement. Not that there shouldn’t be attempts to become better, but they shouldn’t overshadow any appreciation and good leadership. There also might have been an issue with the church elders being accused of impropriety, and Paul advises that Timothy “receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses.” As far as I knew, this was a Jewish law already, but it might not have been predominant in the gentile culture in which the members now lived. The many witnesses does not give any one person power over anyone else in the court of public opinion. But again, this is tricky because many sins and crimes are committed against one individual person by one individual person, so the perpetrator might only have the one accuser but still be just as frickin guilty. So this is again a fine line to be tread between safety for the leadership and safety for the flock. This issue probably should be resolved by taking preventative measures such as open doors in the Sunday school classrooms when there is only one teacher, and the Spirit directing the disciplinary matters of the congregation. Because there might only be one accuser, but the Spirit knows all and can guide appropriately. Paul doesn’t give the brethren a free pass either, because he says “those that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.” Those who are accused and guilty should not be excused, but should be “punished” in the sight on the congregation. Again, this might have been specific to Paul’s time and Timothy’s circumstances because we don’t really do public rebuking very much, not that I can think of. The article makes an interesting point when commenting, “Perhaps this is the reason that Paul counsels Timothy to make a show of the sinners, that the members of the young church may learn what is acceptable and what is not. Perhaps this is the reason that church disciplinary councils in the days of Joseph Smith frequently excommunicated members for lesser indiscretions- sins that would not bring such a heavy penalty today. Early on, the membership needs to learn to fear the judgments of God. However, once the groundwork is laid and the standards are set, mercy and confidentiality may prevail.” All church disciple and welfare must be done “without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality.” This is consistent with the Savior’s teaching that God is not a respecter or persons but loves all equally. Discipline and care must be given to all without regard for our personal feelings. This is a hard thing to do and takes leaders of principle. That’s why Paul says, “Lay hands suddenly on no man.” At first, I thought this had to do with fist fighting and violence, but the IM explains, “this meant that men were not to e ordained without proper preparation. That preparation included ensuring that the one to be ordained was spiritually mature and worthy and seeking the Lord’s guidance.” Again, this goes against lots of our human nature and many times must be taught and earnestly rooted out of our intuition in order to be successful. 5:23-25 – Another piece of counsel, Paul tells Timothy “Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach’s sake and thine often infirmities.” This was a really interesting closing piece to this chapter and kind of caught me off guard. The article comments, “Ours in the only dispensation in which alcoholic consumption has been strictly forbidden. Excessive alcohol consumption has always been discouraged, but Noah, the ancient Jews, the Nephites, the Savior and his disciples all drank a little wine. In Paul’s day of very little medicine, we should not be surprised that the apostle extols the medicinal value of a little wine.” I once read someone asking the question, “why can’t I drink alcohol when Jesus did?” And the answer was something like, “we can’t hold anyone responsible for doing something that was not against the commandments at that time.” I also once heard about a village in Europe hundreds of years ago who only drank beer (ale) because their drinking water had been contaminated and everyone who drank it died. Fermenting their drinking source was the only way to make sure that it was drinkable. Now we have drinkable water almost at every turn, so we really aren’t dependent on fermentation to survive. And we have modern medicine to help our physical ailments. Paul’s counsel to Timothy was to use a little wine to help ease his physical ailments, he couldn’t have taken a Tylenol or Tums or anything like that. Wine might have been the best medical treatment they had at the time and it would have been cruel to deprive them of that relief when we have it so abundantly now. Without using wine for medicine, we now use it to relax or party or escape reality. Alcohol can used negatively in these circumstances with little to no benefit. And anciently, alcohol content in the actual drinks were minimal when compared to ours, so this isn’t exactly an apples-to-apples comparison. We have been commanded to abstain from alcohol in our dispensation because that’s what will lead to our happiness, and different times called for different measures. But if we are obedient to our commandments and covenants now, we will be blessed and one day understand.