i) LYDIA AND THE GODFEARERS
Godfearers were those who followed the practises of the Jews but were not baptised or circumcised and who were therefore not real Jews. They were a link between Judaism and the Gentiles however. Pagan women in particular often became godfearers and Josephus recorded an incident involving them. During the AD66 war the Roman consul Cestius was drawn into the difficulties that Gessius Florus (procurator of Judea) was having with the Zealots. Cestius besieged Jerusalem but had to withdraw. Vespasian took over and Cestius blamed his failure on Florus when reporting to Nero. The inhabitants of Damascus heard of this and wanted to kill off a large number of Jews, but were afraid to, as most of their wives were godfearers.
The reason Judaism appealed to these women was that the Roman system was brutal and supported might and domination whereas the Law offered an ethical framework. Lydia was a well-to-do woman (selling purple was very profitable) and must have had some independence. She and her household were then baptised and became the centre of the Christian community in Philippi. Christianity appealed to godfearers as they did not have to be circumcised, observe ritual laws or be so strict. Galatians 3:28 differed from any other religion with its radical statement �there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.� This was especially relevant because both Greeks and Jews praised above all that they were not female. The community was in anticipation of the eschaton and this �one-ness� was to be normal in the end days.
ii) PHOEBE
Paul sent greetings to the episcopoi, presidents of the council of elders and deacons as well as ordinary people in his letters. Phoebe is referred to using the same word that for men is translated �deacon� which suggests that men and women fulfilled the same function and that there was no distinction made between them. In Romans 16 Paul asked the community to support her because �she too has been a prostasis to many, including myself�. The word prostasis can mean several things, either in the sense of a helper or of a community leader/president; because Phoebe was a woman most commentators have spoken of �personal care�J. Some people, including Susanne Heine, who believes that Phoebe was a deacon and a leader of a community: �According to 1 Thessalonians 5:12 it is the task of the leader of the community to admonish the community. When Paul says that Phoebe has also been a prostasis to him, one might think that she had had occasion to admonish him.�J
1 TIMOTHY & TITUS
- Written after the time of Paul at the start of the Second Century and could not have been written to Timothy or Titus. Things had changed in the meanwhile, bishops must be above reproach, husband of one wife, sober, wise etc. and not a new convert as they are often conceited and proud and must have a good reputation among non-Christians. Let a woman learn in silence with all submissiveness. I permit no woman to teach or have authority over men; she is to keep silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet woman will be saved through bearing children, if she continues in faith and love and holiness, with modesty.�
Prophetic speech in assemblies has now gone. �In another way, it would be a mistake to apply universally Paul�s dictum �I permit no woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man� (1 Tim 2:12). Was it wrong for Pricilla [Prisca] to instruct Apollos (Acts 18:26), or for Victoria to rule an empire?�J However, the word �submission� in the New Testament has many different meanings. These include a slave�s submission to his master, Christian submission to each other, the Son�s submission to the Father and women�s submission is compared to that of the Church to Christ (Ephesians v22ff). However, the submission is always voluntary, men are nowhere told to exact submission from their wives and are told to show them loving meekness as Christ did to the church (Ephesians v25ff). �The �submission� of wife to husband will become, like that of the Son to the Father, an inferiority that is not an inferiority.�J Some have said that therefore the husband has superiority over the wife as Christ did over the saints however, the husband is nowhere compared to Christ. Charles Ryder Smith believed that all forms of submission except one are imperfect. The church�s submission to Christ exists because the church is imperfect, and the community incomplete. Submission here means fear and it will eventually become the nobler submission of all things to God. The wife�s submission occurs only when there is imperfection or disagreement (in temper) instead of meekness. Both the statements on women�s submission are facing the problem of human imperfection.
Charles Ryder Smith believed that the fact that women would be saved through childbirth was not degrading to women as it is not an inferior position but glorious and cannot be degrading as the religion defines the home as a place of God.
Mary Evans has two arguments against women�s subjection from this verse: the verb �to have authority� in this case is not from the normal word for �to have authority� (exousia). It instead comes from authentein, which conveys a sense of being domineering. The Authorised Version has instead �to usurp authority� which may therefore be referring to a particular type of authority. It is also not evident that the saying works vice versa, i.e. that the man has authority over the woman, it may simply be that women were trying to usurp some sort of authority from men and become domineering.
However, some commentators, especially older ones, have taken the reference to Eve in this passage to mean that women should be subject. �For with us indeed the woman is reasonably subjected to the man: since equality of honour causeth contention. And not for this cause only, but by reason also of the deceit (1 Tim 2:14) which happened in the beginning. Wherefore you see, she was not subjected as soon as she was made�But when she made an ill use of her privilege and she who had been made a helper was found to be an ensnarer and ruined all, then she is justly told for the future, �thy turning shall be to thy husband� (Genesis 3:16)�J
1 Tim 3:8-13: �Deacons likewise must be serious, not double-tongued, not addicted to much wine, not greedy for gain; they must hold the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. And let them also be tested first; then if they prove themselves blameless then let them serve as deacons. The women likewise must be serious, no slanderers, but temperate, faithful in all things.�
This means either the deacon�s wife must be all these things, or that the women deacons must be. No wives are mentioned in connection with other ministries, women appear in the rules about ministers and the texts speak of women rather than wives. Heine then suggests that the office of deacon for women has survived until then, but is not important to the author.
There is a new office for women seen in Timothy, that of widow. A widow must have no relatives living and be over sixty. She must have been married only once, be respectable, have brought up children, have practised hospitality and be proven in charitable activity. Widows have some ministerial functions and have to make a public vow.
COLOSSIANS & EPHESIANS
Both pseudepigraphica (not written by Paul). Both texts say that women should be subservient to men for the only reason that it was customary and women were supposed to feel �fear� for their husbands. (Ephesians 5:33) although this has been translated as �respect� in some translations. This was social reality rather than creed but they added divine authority to these sayings so that only a heretic could deny them. (Col 3:18, Ephesians 5:22-5).
1 PETER
Wives are to be subordinate to their husbands in order to win them to Christianity. �Indeed what Paul corrected becomes a generally binding custom. For women to be active in public inside and outside the Christian community is regarded by Christians as shameful. Thus all former activities through which women were of service in mission and building up the community were no longer available, indeed forbidden, to them. Only a few decades later it was possible to forget all these services on the part of women and suppress them�Jbecause they used Paul�s name as authority. Conflicts developed between the rich and poor in the Church as the Church took pride in the rich. Christians adapted to the norms of the time, they sent their wives home, had households and children. This served Roman interests where women had the household and men the ministry � they would not have welcomed a revolution of the sort that might have happened had the early communities� model been continued. To combat Gnosticism also many children were produced so that they could continue to fight against their doctrine and to ensure Christianity�s survival.
GALATIANS 3:28
(There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.)
�I have already pointed out that the Pauline text; �In Christ there is neither male nor female� functions in this manner, for it simply and blatantly ignores the fact that this [Christ] is a male symbol and therefore on this level does exclude the female�J
Both male and female have access to the Father in prayer, share in the Holy Spirit and in the priesthood of all believers (Ephesians 5:18-20, Phil 4:6-7). Even though the Church has adopted the world view of women through the ages, �Christianity from the first held as a matter of theological principle that women are equally capable of salvation, have equal access to public worship and may live in a state of religious dedication.�J Most books dealing with the doctrine of Man in the New Testament do not discuss the relation of sexuality to Man�s relationship to God , which shows the New Testament equality of the sexes to God. However, in the Church and in society in general, men have determined both male and female roles, so that it is a man�s world where women are merely allowed. For Paul, however, both men and women were the Church. All acknowledge that male and female are equal in the sight of God although there are differences of opinion in the precise meaning. All have equal access to the Church through baptism but the distinctive roles remain � Paul was more concerned with unity in the Church than with equality although he did say that all were �sons of God� and therefore heirs and privileged.
1 CORINTHIANS 7:1-9
�It is well for a man not to touch a woman. But because of the temptation to immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. The husband should give his wife her conjugal rights and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not rule over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not rule over his own body, but the wife does. Do not refuse one another except perhaps by agreement for a season, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but come together again, lest Satan tempt you through lack of self-control. I say this by way of concession, not of command. I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own special gift from God, one of one kind and one of the other. To the unmarried and widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as I do. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion.�
Widows would be better off single because married partners would be more concerned with each other than with God and marriage was a commitment to a world which was about to end (7:29,31). However, Paul did not try to force this, he said that they should marry rather than commit a transgression. So he does say that marriage and sex within it are proper thus rebutting some of the claims of feminists that he took away women�s security and only job in those times without providing an adequate replacement. The beginning of this chapter can be rendered �Now concerning the matters about which you wrote. It is well for a man not to touch a woman� or, as the Authorised Version has it, �Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: �it is good for a man not to touch a woman��. The differences between these two are obvious, one being that Paul believed it was good for man not to touch a woman, and one that this was the view of the believers at Corinth and that Paul did not altogether agree. Susanne Heine, among others, believes that the latter is the case.
1 Cor 7:4 may have been written because some women were claiming ownership of their own bodies and perhaps refusing sex because of it as it would have been meaningless for men to claim ownership of their bodies in that society. One of Paul�s aims was to prevent immorality by marriage and this was undermining its whole purpose, hence its inclusion. Corinthian women prophets in particular may have practised sexual abstinence and control over their own body because abstinence was associated with prayer (see 7:5). Antoinette Clark Wine believes that Corinthian women prophets may have practised abstinence in order to �predispose them for communion with God�J In the Greek cults, women closest to the god/goddess would not have sex, at least not for a time. Women prophets in the New Testament were identified by their sex lives for example, Anna who was eighty-four and a widow (Luke 2:36-38), the four daughters of Philip who are virgins (Acts 21:9). The most famous example is Jezebel who �calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and beguiling my servants to practise immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols�. This may mean she left a marriage or was drawing other women away from sexual relations. In contrast, the sexual status of male prophets was rarely discussed, even with Jesus and John the Baptist the only hints are in the use of the metaphor of the bridegroom and unmarried friend and of the mention of Jesus� friendship with sinners and the Baptist�s isolation.
Paul was answering specific questions, possibly from a group who saw sexual asceticism as mandatory and who wanted to renounce their marriages. He replied that he preferred celibacy but only because the eschaton was expected soon. Marriage is the norm and Paul condoned ascetical tendencies within it.
While Paul believed the eschaton would arrive soon and gave a sense of urgency to his writings, he counselled against forgetting to live properly in the meanwhile. Corinth society was based on racial/sexual/social values and Paul�s statement in Gal 3:28 that all were one in Christ negated those so he was dealing with the resulting problems in his letters.
Paul addresses both men and women in the Chapter, which was unusual as most treatises were addressed only to men. Both men and women are treated as having equal moral responsibility and are not treated differently. Decisions are not made by men only. In 1 Cor 7:8-11 the recommendations to unmarried and widowed to remain single are addressed to both men and women. However, Paul does not say that marriage is less perfect than being single, even though he himself prefers the latter. For Paul, marriage is a permanent bond and a married believer cannot set aside his/her marriage.
Paul did not idealise virginity, within a marriage sex is a must for Paul. This ideal of a wife having �conjugal rights� would have been startling as the passive role of women was usually emphasised, as would the idea that husband and wife have mutual authority. Chyrostom wrote that �what is the meaning of �the due honour? The wife hath not power over her own body;� but is both the slave and the mistress of the husband. And if you decline the service which is due, you have offended God. But if thou wish to withdraw thyself, it must be with the husband�s permission, though it be but for a short time�no one is master of himself but that they are servants to each other.� Even John Chyrostom believes that this gives equality, �in all other things�, says he [Paul], �let the husband have the prerogative; but not so where the question is about chastity��there is great equality of honour, and no prerogative.�J
�Now concerning the unmarried, I have no command of the Lord, but I give my opinion as one who by the Lord�s mercy is trustworthy. I think that in view of the present distress it is well for a person to remain as he is. Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be free. Are you free from a wife? Do not seek marriage. But if you marry, you do not sin, and if a girl marries she does not sin. Yet those who marry will have worldly troubles, and I would spare you that. I mean, brethren, the appointed time has grown very short; from now on, let those who have wives live as though they had none, and those who mourn as if they were not mourning, and those who rejoice as though they were not rejoicing, and those who buy as if they had no goods, and those who deal with the world as though they had no dealings with it. For the form of this world is passing away. I want you to be free from anxieties. The unmarried man is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to please the Lord; but the married man is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please his wife, and his interests are divided. And the unmarried woman or girl is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to be holy in body or spirit; but the married woman is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please her husband. I say this for your own benefit, not to lay any restraint upon you, but to promote good order and to secure your undivided devotion to the Lord.
J.K. Eliot believes that 1 Cor 7:25-38 is written to the betrothed. He therefore translates gone as �woman� rather than �wife�.J Paul tells the unmarried to remain so, not because marriage is wrong, but because he wishes to spare them worldly anxieties. It is important that Paul did not see marriage and motherhood as the only or proper vocation for a woman. H�ring sees verses 33 and 43b (�is anxious�how to please his/her wife/husband�) as not being condemnation of this or simply stating a fact, but being the appropriate behaviour for the married.J 1 Cor 7 supports the concept of the place of the wife being in the home just as it supports the concept of the place of the husband being in the home.
The concern of the unmarried girl in v34 to be �holy in body and spirit� has been thought by some such as Conzelmann to show Paul�s ascetic tendency, but he is not suggesting their moral superiority, but rather �clarifies the way in which unmarried women seek to please the Lord.� J There were four principles involved in Paul�s theology about women. The first was that because of the imminent eschaton, celibacy was recommended. Even with this marriage was not something of less value then celibacy, or to be set aside. Indeed, there is a �gleichwertigen Gegenseitigheit�J - �a reciprocity of equal worth, shown especially in marriage�. Paul further adds that both marriage and celibacy are gifts from God.
�Let your women also keep silence in the churches, for it is not permitted unto them to speak, but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home, for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.� (1 Cor 14:34-5)
Susanne Heine says that this is a later insertion as Paul nowhere else warns against the public appearance of women in the community, he does not demand subordination and does not appeal to Jewish law as for him Jesus ended it. There is also no sense of a gap if this passage is left out of the text. St. Chyrostom believed that this was a true part of 1 Corinthians and he translated as many of the older and more prone to misogyny commentators did. �Now if they [women] ought not to ask questions, much more is their speaking at pleasure contrary to the Law. And what may be the cause of his setting them under so great subjection? Because the woman is in some sort a weaker being and easily carried away and light minded.�J
It can well be seen the many differing attitudes towards the portrayal of women in the New Testament. Some, indeed, reject the whole of Christianity itself, as Mary Daly does: �Christ is identical with a name, and that name is �Male� � a fact which he himself unwittingly acknowledged by the exclusive use the masculine pronoun �He� capitalised�- whatever else �He� may be, is not female and not truly �generic.�J However, other than the views of such critics Paul in particular has caused much debate - �In feminist literature Paul is also clearly the most attacked person in the New Testament: he has been made responsible for all the misfortunes of a Christian tradition which is hostile to women and indeed leads to neurosis.�J It is important to distinguish between Paul and the many different communities he was involved with and also to distinguish between traditional material and that which was written in the interests of the time.
There have been many distinctions made between the Gospels and the letters in the New Testament. In general, the feminist critics have been less harsh to the Gospels themselves than to the letters, �There is nothing in the gospel of Jesus that belongs to men rather than to women.�J It seems that the Jesus shown in the Gospels was not by any means a misogynist, and many have thought of him as an early campaigner for women�s rights; �Now, Jesus��wider environment had an androcentric or patriarchal orientation. It was dominated by the animus. Jesus was not. Jesus is the great exception�in his encounter with women Jesus shows understanding, he is without resentment: rather, he is a partner in their concerns�He was persecuted not least for this attitude; it became his destiny.�J However, there are problems with this view, in itself and also in Hanna Wolff�s form. There are some problems with Hanna Wolff�s statement in that it is difficult to find the �historical� Jesus as there are sparse sources and few of these are unbiased due to faith. Any view, including that he was a member of a secret society, a revolutionary or an embodiment of true virtue can be taken from the texts themselves. �Partnership� is not a term taken from Jesus� world and there is a question of whether we in the Twentieth Century can understand someone in the First at all, as things are so different. Jung, who used the term anima to show the male unconsciousness and the animus to show the female, did not talk of the male way of coping with existence being to assume or face responsibility and the female to join with others. This is the view of F.J.J. Buytendijk whom Wolff quotes. Jung said that no one corresponds to just the anima or animus as this would cause destruction. However, it is also true that �nothing could be more clearly attested in the Gospels than the tradition of Jesus� concern for outcasts, those who, for various reasons, were excluded from the fullness of Israel�s life, religious, social or economic. Whether the cause of their separation were hygienic (as with lepers) or ritual uncleanness (the term �sinner� being applied to those unable to keep the law because of their occupations), whether they were actually immoral or heretical or subversive, whether they were in an inferior position because of sex�seems to have made no difference to Jesus� response.�J This shows that Jesus or the evangelists did not have in mind any great programme for women�s emancipation, but rather that he and they were concerned with the oppressed, rather than with any specific group.
However much feminist critics revile the apostle Paul, it is not true that he wrote only for men, nor necessarily that he advocated misogyny. Because of the time in which he was writing and the situation he was involved in, he was not seeking to remake society, and he did not write specifically against women, but rather sought to see a united church. As the head cannot say to the feet, �I do not need you� so the Christian church needs all its members. It is also important to note that the letters of Paul were written for specific problems and were not meant to be applied universally. Discussion in the New Testament of women is only occasional and for specific purposes. �The adoption of an imperfect means as the best possible immediate step towards the attainment of a perfect end.�J The end is that the Kingdom of God cannot be a society of just men, or just women, must be both � �neither is the woman without the man, nor the man without the woman, in the Lord� (1 Cor 11:11) mere independence is abortive, women must have men, and men women. �From beginning to end the Bible doctrine of womanhood gathers around two great words � personality and home. Of these the latter is permanent, the Alpha and the Omega of the long evolution. The former is at first almost the monopoly of man, but slowly woman lays claim to it and at last establishes her claim. And when it is won, lo! it does not mar man�s personality but complexes it, even as it is completed in turn by his.�J
Essentially, the words of the New Testament can be made to say whatever the reader so wishes, as once it was used to promote misogyny, so now it is used to promote equality. Perhaps the answer to the question is not that the New Testament knowingly had a particular view of women, but that it was more concerned with salvation and belief. �Women�, or their rights or possible disadvantages, are not a theme in the early communities, but not because women were insignificant. This is because it was not a matter of rights. The main theme was the Spirit of God, who calls whom he wills, and a �right to the Spirit� would go against the nature of this spirit.�J
Ben Witherington III Women and the Genesis of Christianity Cambridge University Press 1990
* James Donaldson Woman, her position and influence in Ancient Greece and Rome and Among Early Christians (London: Longmans, Green and Co. 1907, p59)
*Pseudo-Demosthenes, Against Neaera 122, Private Orations III (Loeb Classical Library; London: William Heinemann 1939) p444-7
J W.W. Tarn and G.T. Smith Hellenistic Civilisation 3rd Ed. (London: Edward Arnold, 1952) p98
J. Donaldson Woman: Her position and influence in ancient Greece and Rome and in the Early Church p124 (London: Longmans, Green and Co. 1907)
Ben WITHERINGTON III �On the Road with Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Susanna and other disciples � Luke 8:1-3� p244
J. JEREMIAS �New Testament Theology� vol. 1 p226
J. JEREMIAS ibid. p227
Mary EVANS ibid. p48
Mary EVANS ibid. p49
G. B. CAIRD �Luke�
C. F. D. MOULE �The Phenomenon of the New Testament� p64-5
E. P. SANDERS �Paul� (Oxford University Press 1996) p11-12
E. P. SANDERS ibid. p12
Charles RYDER SMITH ibid. p87
John CHYROSTOM �Homilies on the Epistle to the Corinthians�
(from �Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church� ed. Philip Schott vol. XII, New York: The Christian Literary Company 1889. Trans. Rev. Talbot W. Chambers) p150-1
J. CHYROSTOM �Homilies on the Epistle to the Corinthians� (from �Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church� ed. Philip Schott vol. XII, New York: The Christian Literary Company 1889. Trans. Rev. Talbot W. Chambers) p150-1
J. CHYROSTOM ibid.
J. CHYROSTOM ibid.
J. A. ZIESLER �Pauline Christianity� Revised Edition (Oxford University Press 1990) p125
W.J. MARTIN �1 Corinthians 11:2-16: An interpretation� in (�Apostolic history and the Gospel� ed. W. Gasque and R. P. Martin)
N. WEEKS �Of silence and Head Covering� (Westminster Theological Journal 35 1972) p21-7
J. HURLEY �Did Paul require Veils? (Westminster Theological Journal 35 1972) p190
S.A. HURLEY �1 Corinthians (11:2-16):An Interpretation� (W. Th. J. 36 1973) p231-241
Mary EVANS ibid. p239
F.F. BRUCE �1 & 2 Corinthians� p104
N. WEEKS ibid.
C.K. BARRETT �1 Corinthians� p251
G.W. KNIGHT �Male and Female Related He Them� (Christianity Today 21 1975) p710
C.K. STENDAHL �The Bible and the Role of Women� p29; CONZELMANN ibid. p136
Mary EVANS ibid. p90
C. HODGE �1 Corinthians�
Markos BARTH �Ephesians 4-6� p655
F. F. BRUCE �Ephesians� p114
John CHYROSTOM ibid.
F. F. BRUCE ibid. p118
Mary EVANS ibid. p77
Mary EVANS ibid. p81
F. F. BRUCE in E.K. SIMPSON and F. F. BRUCE �Ephesians and Colossians� p287
HEINE ibid. p90
Charles RYDER SMITH ibid. p92
Charles RYDER SMITH ibid. p92
J. MARSH �John�
Mary EVANS �Woman in the Bible� The Paternoster Press 1983 p53
C. E. B. CRANFIELD �Mark� p463
E. SCHWEIZER �The Good News According to Mark�
W. HENDRIKSEN �John�
Mary EVANS ibid. p54
J. CALVIN �Harmony of Matthew, Mark and Luke� p347
Mary EVANS ibid. p55
A. OEPKE �Child� Theological Discussion of the New Testament, 10 Vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: William B Eerdmans Publishing Company 1964-76)
Ben WITHERINGTON III �Women and the Genesis of Christianity� (Cambridge University Press 1990)
Alfred PLUMMER �A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Luke� (Edinburgh: T & T Clark 1922)
R. A. WARD �1 & 2 Timothy and Titus� p86
Mary EVANS ibid. p81
K�SEMANN �Commentary on Romans� p409
HEINE ibid. p89
Charles RYDER SMITH ibid. p82
Charles RYDER SMITH ibid. p83
St. John CHRYSOSTOM �Homilies on the Epistles of Paul to the Corinthians�
HEINE ibid. p139
Mary DALY �Beyond God the Father: Toward a Philosophy of Women�s Liberation� (The Women�s Press 1991)
Don CUPITT �Crisis of Moral Authority� p61)
Antoinette CLARK WINE �The Corinthian Women Prophets � a Reconstruction through Paul�s Rhetoric� (Fortress Press 1990)
J. CHYROSTOM ibid.
J. K. ELIOT �Paul�s teaching on marriage in 1 Corinthians� New Testament Studies 19 (1972-3) p219
J. HERING �1 Corinthians� p61
CONZELMANN �1 Corinthians� p73
KAHLER �Die Frau in den Paulinischen Briefen� p63
John CHYROSTOM ibid.
Mary DALY �Beyond God the Father: Toward a Philosophy of Women�s Liberation� (The Women�s Press 1990) p80
Susanne HEINE ibid.
Charles RYDER SMITH �The Bible Doctrine of Womanhood in its Historical Evolution� (The Epworth Press 1923) p80
Hanna WOLFF �Jesus der Mann. Die Gestalt Jesu in tiefenpsychologiser Sicht� 1975
Charles W. F. SMITH �The Paradox of Jesus in the Gospels� (The Westminster Press, Philadelphia 1970) p26
Charles RYDER SMITH ibid. p18, 106
Charles RYDER SMITH ibid. p109
Susanne HEINE �Women and Early Christianity: Are the Feminist Scholars Right?� (�Frauen de fruhen Christen heit�) trans. John BOWDEN (Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht 1986) p92