Romans 16:1,2

“ Now I commend unto you Phoebe, our sister, which is a deaconess of the church of Cenchrea, that ye receive her in the Lord as becometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she may have need of you; for also she hath been a succorer of many and of myself. ”

Here, according to some, begins a private note entrusted by the apostle to the bearers (Semler), or to the female bearer (Eichhorn), of this Epistle, to indicate the principal persons to be saluted in the churches which were to be visited by the way. Some moderns, D. Schulz, Reuss, Ewald, Laurent, Renan, etc., even think they can, either from the starting-point (Cenchrea), or from certain names in the salutations which follow, positively determine the church for which this note was composed. It was, they hold, the church of Ephesus. We shall examine step by step as we proceed the reasons alleged in favor of this supposition. We only remark here, that many of those who reject the salutations, Romans 16:3-16, from the Epistle to the Romans, yet regard Romans 16:1-2 as having belonged to it (Scholten, Volkmar, Schultz). We note besides, as to the rest of this chapter, the following observation of Schultz: “As long as the destination to the church of Rome of all the parts of chap. 16 can be maintained, this view ought to be preferred to every other.” And, indeed, it will always be difficult to understand how a leaf of salutations intended for the church of Ephesus, or any other, should have strayed into the copy of our Epistle deposited in the archives of the church of Rome (see the remarks at the end of this chapter).

It has generally been admitted that Phoebe was the bearer of our Epistle, and no doubt with reason. For otherwise how are we to explain this so special personal recommendation? Comp. Colossians 4:7; Ephesians 6:21. Paul mentions two titles which point her out for the interest of the Christians of Rome; she is a sister, and, moreover, a servant of the Lord, invested consequently with an ecclesiastical office. It has been denied that at so remote a period the office of deaconess could already be in existence. But why, if there were deacons (Romans 12:7; Acts 6:1 et seq.; Php 1:1), should there not have been also from primitive times a similar office discharged by women, members of the church? With what right can we allege that the office mentioned Romans 12:8 belonged only to men? It seems to us impossible to think that the widows spoken of, 1 Timothy 5:3 et seq., were not persons invested with an ecclesiastical office. And in any case, the ministrations of beneficence of a private nature, mentioned in our Epistle (Romans 12:7), must have been carried out in good measure by sisters. And why should not a rich and devoted woman, who had for a time occupied herself with such work, have borne, even without ecclesiastical consecration, the title of deaconess? If our passage had a later origin than the first centnry, there would certainly have been introduced here, instead of the word διάκονος (deacon), which is the masculine term originally applied to both sexes, the feminine title διακόνισσα (deaconess), already in use in the second century. Comp. the letter in which Pliny relates that he has been obliged to torture two of those servants who are called ministrae (evidently a translation of διακόνισσαι). There were so many services to be rendered to the poor, to orphans, to strangers, to the sick, which women only could discharge! As is observed by Schaff, the profound separation between the sexes in the East must also have contributed to render a female diaconate altogether indispensable.

The participle οὖσαν, who is, expressly denotes that Phoebe is still, at the time of Paul's writing, invested with this office.

Cenchrea was the port of Corinth toward the east, on the Egean Sea; and hence it has been inferred that Phoebe was going rather to Ephesus than to Rome. The proof is far from convincing. “The person in question,” says Schultz himself, “is not a Corinthian who is passing through Cenchrea, but, on the contrary, a woman of Cenchrea who is passing through Corinth, and who is consequently on her way to the west.” A good answer as an argument ad hominem. But, speaking freely, what a puerility is criticism thus handled.

Vv. 2. In the Lord: in the profound feeling of the communion with Him, which binds into one body all the members of the church.

The expression: as becometh saints, may signify, becoming saints who are received, like Phoebe, or saints who are called to receive, like the Romans. It is absolutely necessary to choose between the two meanings?

There is a correlation between the two terms παριστάναι, to stand beside in order to hold up, and προστάτις (protectress, patroness), one who stands before in order to guide or protect. Hence it appears that Phoebe had bestowed care on Paul himself, perhaps during his stay at Cenchrea, mentioned Acts 18:18, and on occasion of an illness. M. Renan informs us that “this poor woman started on a wild winter journey across the Archipelago without any other resource than Paul's recommendation.” Then he adds: “It is more natural to suppose that Paul recommended Phoebe to the Ephesians, whom he knew, than to the Romans, whom he did not know.” As if the titles given to Phoebe, cited Romans 16:1-2, were not enough to interest any church whatever in her!