We read in the New Testament of brethren who were experiencing a famine and would receive contributions from other saints to supply their needs. The same brethren who supplied the need chose a carrier who delivered the supplies (1 Cor. 16:1-2; 2 Cor. 8-9, Romans 15:31). An early example is found in Acts 4:34-37. It reads,
“For neither was there among them any that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto each, according as any one had need. And Joseph, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas (which is, being interpreted, Son of exhortation), a Levite, a man of Cyprus by race, having a field, sold it, and brought the money and laid it at the apostles’ feet.”
Again, Acts 11:28-30 reads, “And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit that there should be a great famine over all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius. And the disciples, every man according to his ability (my emphasis), determined to send relief unto the brethren that dwelt in Judea: which also they did, sending it to the elders by the hand of Barnabas and Saul.” When emergency needs were sent from Christians to areas where the need existed, the carrier left it with either the apostles or elders for proper distribution.
Brethren cared for widows among them (1 Tim. 5:3-8). The text refers to these widows as “widows indeed” and “desolate.” The widows, like orphaned children, had no one to care for them. If they had other family members, their physical family should look to their care that the saints would not be burdened. Refusing to provide for the care of widows in the family is equivalent to being an infidel. Given this fact, other saints may have no choice but to provide for these widows, while exhorting and/or rebuking the family members for their negligence. That a similar approach be taken with orphans is seen by the fact that they appear together as being of the same class. Of the forty three times where orphans are mentioned, only twelve times do we find no mention of widows listed beside it and all but once where it is not mentioned, it is found in the Wisdom Literature of the Old Testament. Both are desolate if they have no family and both of their needs are carried out through the care of individual saints (the ekklesia). Once again, brethren may cooperate in this measure of accountability without forming an orphanage or a house for widows. We have an example of individual Christians cooperating in Jerusalem in Acts 6. Seven men were chosen to address a complaint among the Greeks and the care for the Grecian widows in the daily ministration. The Grecians were murmuring because their widows were neglected, which means the distribution was not equally and justly given to both Jew and Gentile. The daily administration was already in place when they were selected. Jewish favoritism is what brought these seven forward to ensure that the Greeks were not neglected. We sometimes make an unfortunate conclusion that an organization is necessary to accomplish this work because they collected money. The American model of doing good is to give money. I suppose they could have given a working fund to the seven men for the care of the widows, but there’s no evidence of even this arrangement. In the early case of Jerusalem’s need, the apostles received the money that was laid at their feet so they could distribute it to those in need (Acts 4:34-37). Now, due to the increase of disciples, the apostles’ work of prayer and the ministry of the word would take priority over serving tables. The “tables” may have been money-changers or bankers (cf. Matt. 21:12, 25:27; John 2:15) which seems to follow the same practice of the apostles’ work in Acts 4. In this case, they were financial stewards rather than waiters of tables.[1] On the other hand, if there were Jewish widows already being cared for before the seven were appointed, were the Jews now being given money to care for their widows? Given the Jewish culture, it seems probable that they were sharing their homes, food, oil, warm blankets, etc. It is possible, however, that these seven were taking such provisions to them. Whether they took it to them or brought them into their homes and shared their own provisions is impossible to say with certainty. Either way, it described the “daily administration” arranged to ensure that the Gentiles were treated fairly each day.
Some confuse the idea of being organized with being an organization and therefore, these seven men had to be officials of the church organization. in addition, if it is an organization, then there was an exchange of money. The proof is lacking on both accounts. The daily administration could be like the modern-day example of a sister that brings a dish to a family with the flu and while there, she may take out the trash, wash the dishes, etc. Daily care does not require the gift of money. Doing good is not to be equated with the American way of giving money for someone else to do the work. It may have involved the giving of a cup of cold water in His name, visiting the sick and imprisoned, feeding the hungry or clothing the naked. James wrote, “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this: To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world” (James 1:27).
Another class of widows is treated in 1 Timothy 5:9 that describes those who have a pledge or agreement with the brethren in exchange for their provisions. She must meet certain qualifications listed in verses 9-11. It is uncertain what responsibility they would take, if any; but due to the list of qualifications, it would appear that since they have no family to care for, they would devote their lives to the care of others (Qualifications: hospitality to strangers, washed the saints’ feet, relieved the afflicted, diligently followed every good work). Such widows were qualified to be counted in the same class as others who are supported. Once again, that could include giving her money to live or it could simply include the same means that a family member would use when providing for the care of their widows. If they take them in their own number, it may simply involve including a widow into the family. Again, either view taken, it does not require an organization to accomplish this care.
Once we accept the existence of such an organization, we assume when speaking of brethren in a town, that it must be a church organization that is at work. Reading into the text that which is not present can be a dangerous assumption
[1] Goodspeed, E.J. Problems of NT Translation (Chicago, 1945),126-127.