I spent the first 10 years of my career in student ministry, and through that work, I developed a deep love for Scripture, exegeting and teaching it. The love persists, and as my faith and theology have evolved and I have distanced myself from evangelicalism, I find interacting with Scripture more complicated, more perturbing, and far less clear than I once believed. A gift I continue to receive from the Divine is permission: to be unsure, to be disturbed and perturbed, to ask the question that may rattle a traditional interpretation of any given beloved text. Womanist theologian Dr. Wil Gafney explains the practice of midrash: “it fills the spaces between the letters and gaps in the story, making stories more complete, rich and full.”1 Doing midrash gives space for other reads on the same story, and that practice has been liberating for me on my own spiritual journey.
While collaborating on a Lenten devotional with colleagues, I was writing a reflection on Acts 6: 1-5 and I found myself deeply perturbed by this pericope. Join me in doing midrash for this text.
1 In those days when the number of disciples was increasing, the Hellenistic Jews among them complained against the Hebraic Jews because their widows were being overlooked in the daily distribution of food. 2 So the Twelve gathered all the disciples together and said, “It would not be right for us to neglect the ministry of the word of God in order to wait on tables. 3 Brothers and sisters, choose seven men from among you who are known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom. We will turn this responsibility over to them 4 and will give our attention to prayer and the ministry of the word.” 5 This proposal pleased the whole group. They chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit; also Philip, Procorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas from Antioch, a convert to Judaism.
As theologian and ethicist Selina Stone points out: “The vulnerability of the Hellenistic widows, whether due to gender, ethnicity or class, is not adequately recognized by the men in charge.” 2
I am perturbed because right off the bat of the early church, those in power are confronted for their neglect, due to cultural differences emerging between Greek-speaking Jewish Christians and Aramaic-speaking Jewish Christians. I am perturbed because as is too common, women are those who suffer great consequences of neglect. These Hellenist widows are part of two vulnerable groups that religious leaders are meant to care for: widows and foreigners (part of the diaspora of Greek-speaking Jews). I am perturbed because though the apostles come up with a viable solution – a committee of Greek-speaking men to oversee daily service – there is still, in my view, problematic verbiage and action.
Those in power share leadership, and share it with the other cultural community, however, only with the men. Why weren’t the widows put in leadership? Of course one could argue about cultural appropriateness (and even progress) for its time, but I would also argue how Jesus modeled subversive leadership, especially when it came to systems of power. “This proposal pleased the whole group.” (v5) Perhaps we just take the text at face value, however, if we heed Dr. Wil Gafney’s invitation into midrash, could we ask the question if the women are fully satisfied with the proposal? They have raised the concern, perhaps it would have been best if they proposed a solution?
I am perturbed about what the apostles say: “It would not be right for us to neglect the ministry of the word of God in order to wait on tables.”(v2) It is very difficult for me to not read arrogance (and even annoyance) in this statement. The people of God have one job: care for the vulnerable! I am perturbed because so many questions remain: the direct problem has been addressed, but what of the systemic issues at play? Have the apostles addressed their own sentiment of supremacy? What will prevent this from happening again? Furthermore, this is the “go-to” text about the creation of the diaconate, yet that once again centers men, in a text that is ultimately about women. Luke is highlighting the intersectionality at play in the early church, and still very much at play in the church today.
I would be remiss to not mention how much this text touches me as a perimenopausal woman: there comes a time when women simply cannot take it anymore. We do not care anymore what people will think, we’ve left our imposter syndrome in our 20-something year old body, we see things clearly, have an embodied sense of justice, and are courageous. As I do midrash, I imagine a group of widows in perimenopause, grumbling over the neglect, and finally putting their foot down and saying ENOUGH!
- Putting Women Back In The Story with Rev. Dr. Wil Gafney – Queer Theology. (2025, May 5). Queer Theology. https://www.queertheology.com/podcast/588/ ↩︎
- Selina Stone (2024) Overlooked by the Spirit-filled: Womanist
Pentecostalism and the case of the Hellenistic widows, Journal of Pentecostal and Charismatic Christianity, 44:1, 26-38, DOI: 10.1080/27691616.2024.2334051
↩︎
Leave a Reply