Is there any evidence that Junia was not a female apostle?

  • Thread starter Thread starter fnr
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Linusthe2nd said:
Yes, of course. After Barnabas we would have to say thirteen counting Paul. šŸ‘
Click to expand...
Matthias was the replacement of Judas. Barnabas and Paul and Timothy were counted among the Apostles. Extrabiblical tradition has Mark and Luke referred to as Apostles.
 
Whenever Paul uses ā€œapostleā€ he doesnā€™t refer exclusively to the group of ā€œ12 Apostlesā€. He calls himself and Barnabas apostles, for one.
 
In other words, if Junia was called an apostle by Paul, that doesnā€™t mean she was the equivalent to an ordained priest today.
 
thistle said:
You have your question the wrong way round. It should be ā€œis there any evidence Junia was an Apostle?ā€. The answer is no. Only twelve Apostles were chosen, and then a replacement for Judas.
Click to expand...
Iā€™m sorry but that is not quite correct. Twelve men were called to be Apostles. But only eleven of them were actually sent by Christ. The twelfth Apostle was Paul who was called and sent by Christ after the Resurrection. Judas was called but was never sent. Matthias was neither called nor sent by Christ but was consecrated a bishop by the eleven Apostles and as such took his place among the other eleven bishops. So there were twelve bishops of whom only eleven were Apostles until Paul came along.
 
Pons said:
In other words, if Junia was called an apostle by Paul, that doesnā€™t mean she was the equivalent to an ordained priest today.
Click to expand...
My thoughts exactly.

BTW I am reminded of an epithet for Mary Magdalene: ā€˜the apostle to the Apostlesā€™.
 
fnr said:
Iā€™d like to get your take on my reply! šŸ™‚
Click to expand...
I find it unusual that you are advocating the possibility of female ordination, when there is absolutely no evidence to suggest this. Iā€™m sorry, but even Junia as an ā€˜apostleā€™ as Paul uses the word does not translate to being an ordained Bishop.

Also, to be a Catholic in full communion, one must acknowledge that the Church is infallible in faith and morals. This Tradition is dogma. I donā€™t mean to be uncharitable in pointing this out; I would just like you to think about what exactly you are opposing.

Here is a wonderful article explaining female ā€˜ordinationā€™, or lack thereof:

catholic.com/tracts/women-and-the-priesthood

As to the disqualification of certain passages: the Bible is the written Word of God, and the canon was placed by the Church. There is little room to say that a section of it can be discounted because some scholars say it was inserted later. How then can we be certain of any integrity within its pages? Would God really allow His word to be distorted?

Again, this is all with charity in mind. I donā€™t wish to demean you, but our best bet is always the infallibility of the Magisterium. Attempting to disprove Church dogma will always result in failure.
 
fnr said:
In Romans 16:7, Paul writes:
"Greet Andronicus and Junia, my relatives and my fellow prisoners; they are prominent among the apostles and they were in Christ before me. "

Junia is a womanā€™s name. I donā€™t think thereā€™s any serious scholarly debate about that. Some translators over time have translated it as ā€œJuniasā€ to make it a manā€™s name, but thatā€™s not what the original Greek said, as far as I understand the scholarship on the subject.

The quote gives us an important hint of when Junia became a Christian. Paulā€™s Damascus Road experience took place somewhere between 36 and 42 AD/CE. If Junia was ā€œin Christ before me,ā€ she was a very early Christian, at a time before Christianity had spread much beyond the Jewish community. That would corroborate why he describes her, with Andronicus, as ā€œprominent among the apostles.ā€

In the list of greetings in Chapter 16, Paul doesnā€™t mention Peter, so he clearly wasnā€™t in Rome as far as Paul knew it. That makes sense, since the Roman siege of Jerusalem and the flight of the Church there to Pella didnā€™t start until after 62 AD/CE, and Peter was likely there. There were two apostles (bishops) at Rome when Paul wrote the letter. The letter was written around 55-58 AD/CE. That means that sometime between 36 and 55 AD/CE, Junia (with Andronicus) was made an apostle, presumably through apostolic succession, which would make her a bishop in todayā€™s parlance.

Are there holes in my reasoning? Is there evidence Junia was not a female bishop?
Click to expand...
A female bishop? No evidence whatsoever.

Peace,
Ed
 
QUOTE=PeaceInChrist;10052275]I find it unusual that you are advocating the possibility of female ordination, when there is absolutely no evidence to suggest this. Iā€™m sorry, but even Junia as an ā€˜apostleā€™ as Paul uses the word does not translate to being an ordained Bishop.

Fair enough. ā€œApostolicā€ is one mark of the Church. What does that mean?
Also, to be a Catholic in full communion, one must acknowledge that the Church is infallible in faith and morals. This Tradition is dogma. I donā€™t mean to be uncharitable in pointing this out; I would just like you to think about what exactly you are opposing.
Click to expand...
I am only questioning whether female ordination is a matter of faith and morals. Is it? If so, how? I ask because in Latin-based rites, priests canā€™t get married due to the displine of The Western Church. However, some eastern rites lack this discipline, including churches in union with Rome, such as the Maronite church. As such, clerical celibacy is based on discipline within a given rite, not doctine or dogma.

That the annotation to the New American Bible, which was developed in large part by Catholic scholars, indicates that 1 Corinthians 14: 33b-36 are ā€œoften considered an interpolation, reflecting the discipline of later churches; such and interpolation would have to have antedated our manuscripts, all of which contain them.ā€ Thereā€™s a stunning amount of history summed up right there. According to www.biblequery.org/1cormss.htm, the estimated dates for the earliest manuscripts preserved of 1 Corinthians range from ~200 AD - 3rd-4th century. One scholar estimates the ā€œp46ā€ manuscript to be dated to the late 1st century (though this seems to be an outlier in estimating such an early date). Taking the oldest manuscripts to be dated from 200-300 AD, that suggests that there was editing to reflect ā€œthe discsipline of later churchesā€ occurring prior to that range of dates. Notably, that range overlaps the time periods of the persecutions of Christians by Decius and Valerian (mid-200ā€™s), both of which led to crises in ecclesiology (e.g., Novationist schism).

If the interpolation is truly from later writiers, why did Paul not have this discipline in mind here? Or in Galatians 3:8? We do have to contend with other Biblical verses (inlcuding 1 Corinthians 11ā€™s descriptions of man/woman roles), so Iā€™m not concluding that women should be priests, just trying to have a discussion here.

Also, Iā€™m not just ā€œgoing rogueā€ here. Asking what my motivation might be will elicit the same response I give when asking myself such questions is terrifying. Because truth cannot contradict truth. I believe that the Church is the repository of truth, and because I cannot turn my eyes from scholarship on topics like evolution, cognitive science, the Documentary Hypothesis, church history. I will not dismiss with a wave of my hand scholarship that challenges my assumptions about the world, and instead go fearfully down the rabbit hole of dealing with how faith and science work together to illuminate fuller truth. Tradition is not static, but moves toward fuller truth believers prayerfully consider new information in their hearts, as Dei Verbum makes clear.

Iā€™ll respond to the rest of your message as time permits.
 
Pons said:
In other words, if Junia was called an apostle by Paul, that doesnā€™t mean she was the equivalent to an ordained priest today.
Click to expand...
No. Apostles by the meaning of the word means ā€œsentā€ or ā€œone who is sentā€. They are missionaries. The same way today that some missionaries are priests and some are not. Mary Magdalene is sometimes referred to as the ā€œApostle to the Apostlesā€ because it is through her that the Resurrection is proclaimed by the angel (along with the other myrrhbearing women) and she in turn proclaimed the Resurrection to the 11.
 
goarch.org/chapel/saints_view?contentid=401

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Xenia, Deaconess of Rome

Our righteous Mother Xenia of Rome was of a distinguished family. While her parents were preparing to wed her, she stole away secretly, taking two handmaids with her, and departed for Mylasa of Karia in Asia Minor, and there she completed her life in asceticism. She was ordained deaconess by Paul, her spiritual father, who became Bishop of Mylasa. Although she was originally named Eusebia, to conceal her identity, she took the name Xenia - which means ā€œstrangerā€ in Greek - because of her estrangement from her country.
 
newadvent.org/fathers/07153.htm

Apostolic Constitutions Book III

XI. Nay, further, we do not permit to the rest of the clergy to baptizeā€”as, for instance, neither to readers, nor singers, nor porters, nor ministers,ā€” but to the bishops and presbyters alone, yet so that the deacons are to minister to them therein. But those who venture upon it shall undergo the punishment of the companions of Corah. Numbers xvi We do not permit presbyters to ordain deacons, or deaconesses, or readers, or ministers, or singers, or porters, but only bishops; for this is the ecclesiastical order and harmony.

Obviously deaconesses were ordained.
 
ConstantineTG said:
newadvent.org/fathers/07153.htm

Apostolic Constitutions Book III

XI. Nay, further, we do not permit to the rest of the clergy to baptizeā€”as, for instance, neither to readers, nor singers, nor porters, nor ministers,ā€” but to the bishops and presbyters alone, yet so that the deacons are to minister to them therein. But those who venture upon it shall undergo the punishment of the companions of Corah. Numbers xvi We do not permit presbyters to ordain deacons, or deaconesses, or readers, or ministers, or singers, or porters, but only bishops; for this is the ecclesiastical order and harmony.

Obviously deaconesses were ordained.
Click to expand...
Nope.

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_22051994_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_en.html

Peace,
Ed
 
In the Douay-Rheims, the term ā€˜Apostleā€™ is used 1 time in the Gospels, by St. John,
17 times by St. Paul, and
2 times by St. Peter.

In the plural form, the term ā€˜Apostlesā€™ is used 1 time by St. Matthew,
1 time by St. Mark,
7 times by St. Luke. It is found
29 times times in Acts of the Apostles, used
17 times by St. Paul,
1 time by St. Peter,
1 time in Jude, and
2 times in Revelation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top