From Rudolf Schnackenburg:
The Moral Theology of the New Testament
(chapters 28-31)
The Moral Teaching of St. Paul
28. The Anchoring of Moral Precept in the Grace of God
29. The Christian's Struggle with the Powers of Evil
-
-
-
-
30. Conscience and its Formation
31. The Moral Preaching of Paul
In Romans 7:14 there is a metaphor: We are "sold into the power of sin."
This introduces us into an interesting but difficult region in the
world of Pauline thought, his doctrine of man, his anthropology. It is not
possible to go into this more deeply within the framework of this outline.
For the detailed anthropological concepts and views he employed, reference should
be made to the relevant works, particularly those of Scharf, Gutbrod,
Bultmann and Stacey. {264} The sphere of the sarx, the
"flesh", in man, is one which sin makes entirely its own. Because unredeemed
man is "of the flesh", he is subject to sin (Rom. 7:14). When and
because we were "in the flesh", the sinful lust of our members
acquired power, so that we brought forth fruit unto death (Rom. 7:5). In
unredeemed man (that is, in his sarx), so St. Paul explains, there
dwells nothing that is good (7:18). The thinking of the sarx is
orientated towards death and is at enmity with God; hence "in the sarx"
we cannot please God (8:6-8). Even now that we are Christians, if we live
"According to the flesh", we shall die (8:13).
In that way the sarx itself appears as a power working for
evil and as an associate of sin. It is not a "part" of man, as it
were his bodily, sensual side in contrast to the intellectual sphere of the
soul, and so cannot be understood on the basis of the dualism of soul and
body. Even sins which we would consider sins of the "spirit" such
as envy, jealousy and anger are "works" of the sarx (cf.
Gal. 5:20f.); and even more the false "glorying" before God, the
appeal of the Jew to his privileges (2 Cor. 11:18), the striving of the Greek
for human wisdom (cf. 1 Cor. 1:26), are in accordance with the sarx.
The basis, therefore, is the Hebrew and Semitic anthropology which takes man
as a whole but can view him from various standpoints. Certainly the concept
of sarx refers to the corporeal and sense-endowed character of man but
nevertheless signifies the whole man in his frailty, liability to temptation,
and slavery to sin. Man as sarx confronts God and, trusting to
himself, is powerless and prone to evil. The power of sin uses the weak sarx
as a point of attack (cf. Rom.7:5,25), in order in this way to take
possession of the whole man. The expressions in the Qumran texts are
significant, "ungodly flesh" (1 QS XI, 9), "the sin of
flesh" (1 QS XI, 12—for any sin), and even "the spirit of
flesh" (1QHXII, 13). Because man is "flesh", he is transitory
and unsubstantial, but also evil and sinful. And so Paul can even say that
God has sent his son "in the form of the flesh of sin" (Rom. 8:3).
The sarx {265} only becomes a really "sinful"
power which leads to transgressions, when man submits to its domination,
makes it a rule of his action (kata sarka), and delivers himself up to
its sinful desires and passions. Unredeemed man, however, is in fact, on
account of his weakness, hopelessly its slave.
However, Paul also employs another usage, in which "flesh"
and "in the flesh" do not have a negative character but merely
signify our earthly existence in a neutral way (cf. 2 Cor. 10:3; Gal. 2:20;
Phil. l:22,24; Eph. 2:11; Philem. 16). But whenever the pattern of human life
is determined only by the sarx (and not by the pneuma),
it becomes ungodly and inimical to God, that is, it assumes a negative
character. This is clearly the meaning of 2 Corinthians 10:3, "For,
though we walk in the flesh, we do not war According to the flesh. For the
weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty to God unto the pulling
down of fortifications ...". Hence as Christians we do not owe it to the
sarx to live According to the sarx but in the Spirit, we are to
mortify the works of the flesh (Rom. 8:12f.). He who sows in the sarx
will reap corruption from the sarx (Gal. 6:8).
The sphere of the sarx manifests itself in the body, acojm
(another concept with many possible connotations), insofar as this is the
seat of the desires and passions (Rom. 6:12). These evil impulses, bound in
service to the power of sin, may also receive the added designation: "of
the sarx" (Gal. 6:16; Eph. 2:3; cf. also Rom. 13:14).
"Body" is favoured by Paul when he is speaking of the
"members" (Rom. 6:13) which serve the power of sin either as its
weapons or as its slaves (6:19). For the sinful passions are, According to
Paul, at work in our members (Rom. 7:5); hence we must mortify those "members
which are on the earth" and are the cause of many vices (Col. 3:5).
Finally there is another contributor to the constellation of evil,
the law (ho nomos; see above, section 21). Although in itself it is
holy (Rom. 7:12) and spiritual (Rom. 7:14), its effects have been
catastrophic, because "I am carnal" (7:14). The actual {266} effect
of the law is to promote the power of sin, for by its injunction "you
shalt not covet", it awakens the desires sleeping in the flesh (Rom.
7:7f.), and so it enables the power of sin to invade man and subject man to
itself.
Paul describes the co-operation between the power of sin, the law and
concupiscence in the difficult and very controverted seventh chapter of the
Epistle to the Romans. The dark and despairing struggle of man against the
violent assault of sin and abandonment to death described by St. Paul in
verses 14ff. is not, as Augustine, the Reformers and earlier Protestant
exegetes thought, and as modern Protestant exegesis now largely admits, to be
interpreted as referring to the redeemed, nor is it to be explained as
Pauline autobiography. It refers to unredeemed mankind, here introduced by
the stylistic device as "I". It is scarcely a matter, either, of
distinguishing different periods of human life before Christ (finding,
perhaps, in v. 9a a reference to the time before the giving of the Mosaic
law, and in v. 9b-13 to the period that followed). The whole chapter is to be
seen as a thematic description, carried through vigorously with objections
and vivid metaphor, of the problem of sin and the law. Verses 1-6 are devoted
to the basic thesis and plan; verses 7-13 to the justification of the divine
law, which has been made use of and abused by the power of sin (which again,
for its own part, must serve the divine plan of salvation); and verses 14-25,
to the operation of the law and sin in the unredeemed human being. {267}
There is one other misunderstanding we must be careful to avoid. In 7:14-23,
Paul is certainly not describing a struggle between a higher, nobler part of
the natural man and the dark powers within him driving him towards sin, but
is making a general statement about the hopelessness of the resistance to
this overpowering by the power of sin. Paul's account may give the wrong
impression because he was trying to emphasize the fact that the human being
in question "was conscious of being lost in sin and hence of doing evil
and not fulfilling the law". In reality, for Paul, the whole unredeemed
human being is sold under sin: (the "I" is "carnal" v.
14); just as the whole man is called to redemption. This will be completed
only when God re-awakens our "mortal bodies" through the Holy
Spirit who dwells in us (8:11). The question whether an unredeemed human
being can do absolutely nothing good is another matter altogether (see below,
section 30, 2). But the conclusions we have reached here through the exegesis
of Romans 7 are important, because they make untenable the theory that St.
Paul thought of the realm of the body and the senses as corrupt in itself and
so depreciated what belongs to the body and matter, in a Platonic or Gnostic
manner, and held there is a dualism within man himself. His more Jewish
presuppositions make it certain that this was not the case.
The way in which all these powers of evil work together is shown most
strikingly at Romans 7:5, "For, when we were {268} in the flesh, the
passions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members,
to bring forth fruit unto death"; but St. Paul also continues,
"But now we are loose from the law of death, wherein we were detained;
so that we should serve in newness of Spirit, and not in the oldness of the
letter" (v. 6). Here, then, we are given the outline of the new state of
affairs. To be filled with the Spirit of God is the beginning of redemption,
but it is also a moral call to a new and real service of God. Yet we are
still temporarily surrounded by the old evil aeon "this age" (Gal.
1:4; cf. Rom. 12:2; 1 Cor. 3:18), and the children of God, and with them the
whole creation, are still waiting for the perfect revelation of the glory of
God, when the creation will be truly set free from its slavery to
ephemerality, from the curse of sin and the stigma of death (cf. Rom. 1:18
ff.) St. Paul's view of the consequences for morality of the position now
reached in the history of salvation, this standing "between the
ages", a position, rich in tensions, between the beginning and the end
of redemption, is examined in greater detail in the following sections.
28. The Firm Anchoring of
Moral Precept in the State of Salvation bestowed
on us by the Grace of God
{269} AT THE beginning of the Christian way of salvation stands, for
St. Paul, salvation by grace, the gift from God of justification on the
ground of faith in Jesus Christ. But just as God's working in the preaching
of Jesus called on men to make a choice and bound them to fulfil the divine
will without reserve, so also According to St. Paul, God's saving act binds
man to the service of the new Lord, to whom he submits freely and joyfully.
This happens in baptism, in which the vocation of the believer is effectually
fulfilled. Baptism — which, also According to Paul,
every believer undergoes; there can be no doubt about that — is the place
where every individual shares in salvation, where he enters into communion
with Christ and becomes a member of {270} the "Body of Christ". But it is
precisely this deeply significant sacramental act itself which is for St.
Paul the point of insertion of moral obligation. Baptism by immersion gave
the apostle the opportunity to destroy the misunderstanding of the
libertines, According to which we can and should sin in order to increase
grace (Rom. 6:1ff.). If the person baptized is immersed in the water (St.
Paul argues), disappears under the surface and so is "buried", the
"old man" of the power of sin dies, by being "crucified with
Christ" (Rom. 6:6); he is now dead to sin; how then can he sin any more?
But at the same time the neophyte receives a new life, by being united
"with Christ", who was raised from death by the power of the
Father, and shares in his resurrection life. This divine life will, of
course, only be revealed in its plenitude and glory at the resurrection at
the last day (Col. 3:3f.), but it is already ours now, and we belong to it.
God has already "quickened (us) together with him" (Col. 2:13; Eph.
2:5); and we are also to live for him (Rom. 6:11). It is the tension between
what we already possess and what we do not yet possess which demands so
imperiously our ethical probation; this alone makes what we have already
received our permanent possession, and makes it possible for us to hope to
receive the full inheritance in the future from God.
St. Paul varied these basic ideas in his moral teaching by the use of
constantly changing new images and points of view. We are transferred from
slavery or military service under sin to the service of God (Rom. 6:12-14;
16-23). Through Christ we are reconciled to God, but we must also reconcile
ourselves with God (2 Cor. 5:19, cf. 20). The Spirit of God dwells in us and
drives us on, but we must allow ourselves to be impelled by him and mortify
the (sinful) works of the body (Rom. 8:11; cf. 13). We live in the Spirit,
now we must walk in the Spirit (Gal.5:25). {271} We have died with Christ, and now we must mortify our
members on the earth (Col. 3:3; cf. 5). Our "old man" has been
crucified with Christ (Rom. 6:6), but we in turn must put off the old man and
put on the new (Eph. 4:22-24; Col. 3:9f.). Sometimes the indicative and the
imperative are juxtaposed: "Purge out the old leaven, that you may be a
new paste, as (indeed of course) you are unleavened" (1 Cor. 5:7). This
sudden glance back to what the Corinthians already are, namely, persons
purified from the old leaven of malice and wickedness (v. 8), can only refer
to baptism, which is here adduced as a strong ground for the obligation of
holiness which is incumbent on them. "Be what you already (through
grace) are": this is the very point made by the words at Ephesians 4:1:
"Walk worthy of the vocation in which you are called."
It has been held that the tension between the sinlessness of the
Christian and the call not to sin can only be accounted for, by saying that
Paul did not succeed in reconciling his doctrine of justification, especially
his "magical" and sacramental ideas about baptism, with his ethics. But it is now widely admitted that this tension is an essential part
of his thinking about the history of salvation. Yet the dogmatic explanation,
going back to Luther, that the Christian may be at one and the same moment
justified and a sinner, still survives in many forms. On the basis of clear
Pauline texts, the Catholic doctrine of justification concludes {272} that Paul saw
baptism as conveying a real forgiveness of sins and genuine, objective
sanctification (see especially 1 Cor. 6: II).
That for the Christian the power of sin has already been overcome,
and yet has not yet been completely expelled, is due to the fact that we
still live in "the mortal body" (Rom. 6:12) and hence within the
sphere of influence of the sarx with its lusts and passions (Gal. 5:16
f.; cf. 24). Death, the last of the powers of destruction, has indeed been
defeated in principle by the resurrection of Christ, but has not yet been
finally swept away. This will be done only at the resurrection on the last
day (1 Cor. 15:26 and 54 f.). Thus the eschatological perspective was
essential to St. Paul (see below, section 29), and the moral exhortation
follows inevitably from this.
But before we examine more closely the Christian struggle against
those powers of destruction which still exist, even though they may not be
terrifying any more, let us note the moral value implicit in St. Paul's basic
thought: God's freely given saving gifts impose the obligation on man to
fulfil what he owes to God. Paul thus traces back to God all power to act
morally, yet summons men most imperatively to action. He makes impossible any
kind of conceited and dangerous building on our own strength (cf. 1 Cor.
10:12) yet rouses the innermost powers of man. He is not attempting to
explain the ultimately impenetrable mystery of co-operation between God and
man, but to teach man what his authentic moral attitude before God should be,
and demand it from him. The result is, that religion and morality are brought
into the closest possible relationship; faith imperatively demands proof in
moral action, {273} especially in love (Gal. 5:6) and moral endeavour is
nothing unless it is based on God's saving power, that is, on the Holy
Spirit. That is more than providing morality with a religious motivation; it
is giving it a supernatural foundation. Man's despairing failure on the plane
of his purely "natural" existence (cf. Rom. 7), becomes a new,
hopeful start on the plane of his new life in Christ. St. Paul affirmed that
there could be a natural ethics grounded in the law written in the heart
(Rom. 2:14; see below, section 30, 2), but conscious of the realities of
history he wrote, "All have sinned and are in need of the glory of God"
(Rom. 3:23). The "law" of faith (that is, the new order of
salvation based on faith) makes all boasting impossible (Rom. 3:27).
Furthermore we can see in this fundamental concept of St. Paul the
chief source of moral motives. The attempt has been made to regard the basis
of Pauline morality as union with Christ; but this motive is accompanied by
many others springing from faith, divine election and vocation,
reconciliation with God, the gift of the Spirit, etc. The most general and
important of all the motives in the plenitude of motives flowing from the
wealth of the world of Pauline theological ideas, is to be found in the
divine work of salvation as it is preached in the message of Christ. Besides,
St. Paul is not an avowed system-builder, but rather a man filled with
passionate love for Christ, who by preaching and pleading, teaching and
exhorting, is trying to bring human beings to Christ. With this missionary
and pastoral purpose, he uses all the motives at his disposal, but gives
first place to the supernatural arguments based on his doctrine of
redemption. The passion of the thinker and the intense drive of the lover of
souls show themselves not least in the multitude and close weave of his moral
arguments.
As an example of this we may quote Paul's attempt in 1 Corinthians
6:12-20 to keep the Corinthians (whose city was a slough of sexual excesses —
According to Strabo VIII, 6, 20 {274} there were over a thousand temple
prostitutes at the Temple of Aphrodite) from fornication. Several quite separate
motives are urged in this terse extract. First, in verse 12, the apostle
meets the slogan of the libertines, "All things are lawful to me",
in the same slogan-like style, "But all things are not expedient",
and again, with a play on words, "All things are lawful to me — but I
will not be brought under the power of any". Next, in vv. 13-14, he
counters the dangerous objections, "Meat for the belly, and the belly
for the meat; but God shall destroy both it and them." In his reply he
deals with both these propositions, saying, (a) "the body is not for
fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body", and (b)
"God has both raised up the Lord and will raise us up by his
power". Then he begins again ("Don't you know..."), making the
Christian counterattack. He contrasts carnal union with prostitutes with the
union, also extremely close, but in the Spirit, between the faithful and
Christ. The Christian cannot surely leave the communion of Christ and join
the prostitutes, (vv. 15-17). There follows another new beginning, in which
St. Paul exhorts his readers, "Flee fornication". Now he suddenly
introduces a motive that seems very much of the natural order and, from the
logical point of view, not even very convincing: "Every sin that a man
does is outside the body; but he that commits fornication sins against his
own body" (v. 18). Probably he is appealing here not to reason, but to
the feeling that unchastity encroaches more than other sins (than perhaps
theft or robbery) on the inner domain of a human being. But now the key-word
"body" {275} leads him straight to another motive that is
meaningful only to the faithful: "Or know you not that your members are
the temple of the Holy Ghost, whom you have from God?" (v. 19a). And
finally the thought of God, the giver and lord of all things reaches its
climax in the divine act of redemption, through which we became entirely his
property: "... and you are not your own. For you are bought with a great
price,glorify and bear God in your body" (vv.
19b-20).
The basic mood the apostle awakens in this way in Christians is one
of joy and gratitude. But above all he speaks of liberty as what is gained
from justification by God (that is, the blessing of salvation), and as what
characterizes our present state of redemption. The Christian should be aware
of this great gift and it should lead him to good moral behaviour in freedom.
It is very important to him for the contrast it presents to his former
servitude to the law and sense of powerlessness. "By the freedom by
which Christ has made us free, stand fast and be not held again under the
yoke of bondage" (Gal. 5:1): such is the appeal St. Paul makes to those
Galatians who were on the point of allowing themselves to be talked into
circumcision by the Judaizers. We hear a joyful cry of liberty at the end of
Romans, the account of the terrifying struggle against being overcome by the
power of sin. Because his fundamental conception showed him liberation from
the powers of evil as being at the same time union with God, he guards
Christian liberty {276} against the misunderstandings which constantly have
beset, and still do beset, this concept. Freedom is not independence of
everything, but only independence from evil; true moral freedom is freedom to
do good. Hence Paul says at Galatians 5:13, "You, brethren, have been
called unto liberty. Only make not liberty into an occasion for the flesh;
but by charity of the Spirit serve one another". The outcome of true
liberty is the fulfilment, that is the "doing" (cf. v. 14) of the
whole law through love, as Jesus preached it. In the following verses it is
made clear that this is possible through the Spirit of God given us.
"But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law" (v.
18), and yet you fulfil the good that God willed in the law.
In these words the antinomy we should otherwise be bound to find in
Paul is resolved: Christians are freed from the law, and yet fulfil the law;
they are free, yet they are serving. What Paul found burdensome in the old
law was less its precepts than the threat of punishment connected with them,
which for everyone who did not keep the law, could not but turn to
malediction (Gal. 3:10-12); less its validity than its coercive rule; less
its compulsion itself than the compulsion to sin that was bound up with it.
It is from this that believers in Christ have been freed, because they do not
find salvation by the way of faultless observance of the law, but by the
mercy of God. The new Christian liberty that Paul is referring to, will be
clear to us if we remember its orientation (freedom to .. .) and its
possibility (by the Holy Ghost. . .). We already possess the freedom to do
good (that is, moral freedom) through the Holy Spirit, who impels us from
within, guiding us and giving us the power of victory over the sarx
(cf. Gal. 5:16). Hence we attain to the virtues (v. 22 f.) not by our own
strength, but as a "fruit of the Spirit", and need no longer fear
the curse of the law, as "against such there is no law" (v. 23).
The nature of freedom as on the one hand a blessing of redemption and on the
other a moral duty, is disclosed by this double view of it: that it is both
"freedom from" and "freedom to". {277} At this point we
can see the difference between the concept of religious liberty in Paul and
the high ethical ideal of liberty of the Stoics. For the Stoic sage, liberty
was defined as the power to act of oneself (auTorcpoqm) and he went forward
to moral freedom (freedom to do good). But he saw this as consisting in
self-mastery, in freedom from passions (araxoteta), in the steadfastness to
remain unshaken by all the blows of fate (aTapa^ia), in short, in full
control over oneself. To St. Paul such self-mastery was a deception and a
lie, for human beings are never fully capable of it, and either without
noticing it or without admitting it, remain imprisoned by the world of the sarx,
the sinfuhiess of their fallen nature. It was axiomatic to him that we must
be given true liberty by God, for it is the divine pneuma that
overcomes the sarx.
When Paul sees the highest demonstration of Christian liberty as
residing in love (Gal. 5:13), another valuable consequence of his fundamental
idea appears: the Spirit of God at work in us does not lead us to an ethics
of personality in which the moral ego rests in itself and finds happiness
therein, but to active participation in the community. Just as the Holy
Spirit necessarily makes us members of the Body of Christ at baptism (cf. 1
Cor. 12:13; Gal. 3:28), so also he builds this up through our moral actions,
through love. Even his extraordinary gifts are given us only "for the
profit of all" (cf. 1 Cor. 12:7; cf. 14:26), and the growth of the Body
of Christ is accomplished "in love" (Eph. 4:15f.; cf. Rom.
12:9ff.). Thus, even in "social ethics", if one likes to call it
such, there is to be found confirmation of Paul's basic concept, that the
Christian's whole moral activity is only the operation, the working out of
the divine powers given us, an allowing oneself to be moved by the Holy
Spirit. {278}
29. Between the Ages. The
Christian's Struggle with the Powers of Evil still Existing in the World
THE MORAL doctrine of St. Paul has two focal points: the
redemption already given us by God impelling us towards the sancti-fication
of our way of living, and the salvation we have not yet attained demanding
the exertion of all our powers if we are to achieve it. The Corinthians had
no lack of the gifts of grace, and they were awaiting the revelation of the Lord
Jesus Christ, who would strengthen them until the end, so that in the day of
Jesus Christ (the parousia), they might be without crime (1 Cor. l:7f.). The
eschatological point of view was indispensable to the whole of Paul's
thinking.
Judgement on the basis of works?
But this orientation towards the last end raises a problem of which
Protestant theology is very conscious. How can justification by faith be
reconciled with the threatened judgement on the basis of works? Lutheran
theology ascribes the salvation of man to the grace of God alone and still
regards human beings as sinners even if {279} they are pardoned in the
judgement of God. It has difficulties in reconciling this with the Pauline
doctrine of a judgement According to works. How can the Christian who in
spite of his sinfulness can confidently expect to be acquitted by God at the
judgement on the grounds of his faith in Jesus Christ, then be asked about
his works? For judgement According to works involves the possibility of one
of two verdicts, eternal salvation or damnation. In recent times attempts
have sometimes been made to soften this "contradiction". The
explanation, for example, is suggested that Paul was thinking of the
judgement of Christians as a saving judgement, even if he does not usually
express this thought in his admonitions. In spite of all his shortcomings and
in spite of the sin inhering in him, the Christian will nevertheless be
acquitted on the grounds of what God or Christ has done. But if one argues in this way, is not one taking all true seriousness
and force from the motive of judgement in Paul? And can it be shown that
Paul's threats of exclusion from the kingdom of God for Christians who sin
greatly (cf. 1 Cor. 6:9f.) were only intended rhetorically? There is an overwhelming amount of material in the texts foretelling
strict testing by the final judge and requital according to one's acts.
"We must all be manifested before the judgement seat of Christ, that
everyone may receive the proper things of the body, According as he has done,
whether it be good or evil" (2 Cor. 5:10; cf. Rom. 14:10). Paul
continually warns his Christian communities that vicious people will not
inherit {280} the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9f.; Gal. 5:21; Eph. 5:5). The
wrathful judgement of God still menaces such sinful Christians (Col. 3:5f.).
"Do not be deceived; God is not mocked. For whatever things a man shall
sow, those shall he also reap" (Gal. 6:7f.). The completely typological
pattern of thought in 1 Corinthians 10:1-13 is intended to save Christians
from false confidence that they might indulge in through trust in the
sacraments. Paul does, indeed, in almost all these texts, proceed to restore
the confidence of the recipients of the epistles by a reminder of God's
faithfulness and the strength he gives them. It would be difficult, however,
to see his warnings as no more than pedagogical threats or metaphorical
retention of Jewish ideas.
For St. Paul, not even the Christian can escape the general judgement
of God "who will render to every man According to his works" (Rom.
2:6; cf. 2 Cor. 11:15; Gal. 5:10; Eph. 6:8 and 2 Tim. 4:14). This doctrine
formed part of Paul's basic missionary preaching (1 Thess. 4:6). But the
apostle expected that the Christian, once saved from the wrathful judgement
of God and filled with the Holy Spirit, who inclines him towards what is
good, would never again fall into the old vices, and that as a result his
primary salvation would be permanent. We have been acquitted (Rom. 5:1) and
we shall be acquitted (cf. 5:19). This picture of the judgement in which we
see deliverance from sin and guilt on the one hand as having already taken
place, and on the other as still to come, always refers to God's sentence of
mercy granted because of Christ's atonement; {281} but it presupposes
that between his first justification and final acquittal at the last
judgement, the Christian has died to the power of sin (Rom. 6:11) or been
cleansed by the discipline of the Lord (1 Cor. 11:32), and does not incur the
sentence of eternal damnation. St. Paul says with conviction that Christians
will not be "condemned with this world" (1 Cor. 11:32), and often
distinguishes them as those who are saved from the others who perish.
Understanding justification differently
In the Catholic view, the way out of the difficulty is not to be
found by watering down the sayings about the judgement but by understanding
justification differently. Salvation does indeed come only by the grace of
God; but after baptism, the cleansed and sanctified human being must
cooperate with the grace of God. And at the last judgement God or Christ will
examine him very closely about the "good works" that he has done in
that way with the help of God. But does not such a doctrine open the door to
the return of Jewish ideas of achievement and reward? No, there is no
possibility in this doctrine either for any boasting among men (Rom. 3:27).
Such "works" are rather a "fruit of the Spirit" (Gal.
5:22), and the reward is a gratuitous gift. Paul, too, speaks of
"work"; he avoids the plural quite deliberately in order not to recall the thought of
the Jewish works of the law. Hence judgement according to his works of every
human being individually is not a disturbing {282} foreign body in Pauline thought, any
more than the idea of retribution was for Jesus himself (see above, section
16). But it plays a different role for Paul from what it did in Jewish
theology. It is awaited but not feared; it is a spur to moral endeavour, but not to
self-righteousness and presumption. As with Jesus, it is a motive in moral
exhortation, but not the principal motive.
Perhaps the best characterization of the position in which we
Christians find ourselves with regard to salvation would be that of
"hope", but our hope is not vague and empty; it is based on God's
saving acts and the salvation already given us (cf. Rom.. 5: 1-11). We are'
'saved by hope'' (Rom. 8:24). Galatians 5:5 expresses it very compactly,
"For we in the Spirit, wait for the hope of justice" (that is, the
justice we hope for). Because we already possess the Spirit and with the Spirit
the beginning of salvation, we can look forward "much more" surely
(cf. Rom. 5:9f.; 2 Cor. 3:9f.) to the full inheritance and final
justification. Like liberty, hope is both a blessing of salvation and a moral
duty. It shows itself especially in readiness to suffer and in steadfastness
(UTTOIW): Rom. 5:3; 8:25; 12:12; 2 Cor. l:6f.; 1 Thess. 1:3), in confidence
(2 Cor. 3:12) and even in joy (Rom. 12:12), in the midst of all the
tribulations of this world, of which the Christian may even "boast"
(Rom. 5:3). The deeper reason why hope must be the specific Christian
attitude and virtue "between the ages", is the fact that the
Christian still lives in a body capable of death and suffering, and is still
held fast in this world characterized by evil. We walk as yet in faith, not
by sight (2 Cor. 5:7; cf. 1 Cor. 3:12) and so our faith is also a hope.
"If we hope for that which we see not, we wait for it with
patience" (Rom. 8:24). But our steadfastness must prove itself in the
sufferings of this present world-epoch (Rom. 8:18). {283} This same thought
lies behind many texts in which hope is not expressly mentioned but is
presupposed, for example, 2 Corinthians 4:16-18, "For which cause we
faint not; for though our outward man is corrupted, yet the inward man is
renewed day by day. For that which is at present momentary and light of our
tribulation works for us above measure exceedingly an eternal weight of
glory; while we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things
which are not seen. For the things which are seen are temporal; but the
things which are not seen are eternal." In his exhausting activities,
menaced every day by death, a "spectacle to the world, and to angels and
to men" (1 Cor. 4:9), the apostle embodied in himself in the fullest possible
way this power to suffer and this hope.
Saved, yet struggling
By his atoning death Jesus Christ has, indeed, saved us in principle
from this "present evil world" (Gal. 1:4), so that we no longer
need to walk according to the "course of this world" (Eph. 2:2),
but "this world" (an equivalent expression) temporarily continues
to exist, although its form is passing away (1 Cor. 7:31) and the end of the
ages has come on us (1 Cor. 10: II). Hence, "this world" is still
an evil place of temptation, all around us, and we need the admonition, "Be
not conformed to this world, but be reformed in the newness of your
mind" (Rom. 12:2). God has indeed "delivered us from the power of
darkness and has delivered into the kingdom of the Son of his love"
(Col. 1:13); but Christ still rules hidden in heaven, and hence we are to
seek the things that are above (Col. 3:1 f.). We are, as it were, a colony of
citizens of heaven, for "our conversation (that is, citizenship) is in
heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, our Lord Jesus Christ, who
will reform the body of our lowness, made like to the body of his {284}
glory" (Phil. 3:20f.). "This age" or "this world" or
"the world" is also used to designate men and things that have not
been brought by Christ into the divine domain. Hence St. Paul says that the
world is crucified to him and he to the world (Gal. 6:14).
But above all there are still at work in this world super human,
spiritual powers, angelic-demonic forces, which in Paul's view opposed the
dominion of God, over the world openly and autocratically, and which were
only subjugated by Christ, but again only in principle, as it were, so that
they still have influence in this world. It is probably such "rulers of
this world" that Paul describes as sharing in the crucifixion of Jesus
(1 Cor. 2:6, 8). They, of course, failed to recognize the wisdom of God, who
raised the crucified to be the "lord of glory". As Paul says in
another metaphor, Jesus has despoiled these powers and forces of their
weapons and has exposed them publicly, leading them in his triumph (Col.
2:15). At Ephesians 1:21 this triumph is described by saying that God has
raised up Jesus to rule with him at his right hand, far above "all
principality and power, virtue and dominion . . .". But the ruler
"of this air" (under which image these powers are in part imagined)
still works through the sons of disobedience (Eph. 2:2). The "god of
this world" has blinded the minds of unbe lievers (2 Cor. 4:4). Clearly
this is Satan, against whom Paul warned those to whom he wrote because
"we are not ignorant of his devices" (2 Cor. 2:11). Satan can
clothe himself as an angel of light (2 Cor. 11:4), and has even worked
outwardly against the apostle in his work (1 Thess. 2:18). Paul was afraid
that this tempter had led the Thessalonians astray and his own work had been
in vain (1 Thess. 3:5; cf. also 1 Cor. 7:5). {285} Are these merely
"mythological expressions"?
The language is often metaphorical and the ideas are in keeping with the old
picture of the world ("the middle kingdom of the air"). But it
cannot be denied that Paul saw spiritual realities behind these images. He
shared this conviction about the kingdom of satan with the whole of early
Christianity and with Jesus himself.
The Christian must also fight these cosmic powers of evil afresh.
This struggle is described most fully at Ephesians 6:10-17. In the strength
of the Lord, with the armour of God, the Christian can withstand the
onslaughts of the devil and all the "rulers of this world of
darkness". The supernatural armament of the Christian is described in
metaphors which are in the main taken from the language of the Old Testament:
loins girt about with truth; clothed with the breastplate of justice; feet
shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace. With the shield of faith, we
are to extinguish all the fiery darts of the evil one. And in addition we
wear the helmet of salvation and grip the sword of the Spirit, that is, the
word of God.
War of the Sons of Light
One of the recently discovered Dead Sea manuscripts is a book of the
"War of the Sons of Light against the Sons of Darkness" which in a
similar strain describes by a warlike metaphor the eschatological struggle of
the chosen ones of "God's Covenant" against the powers of darkness.
God supports the sons of light. The superscriptions on the banners of the
{286} army of God are characteristic. On the great banner carried into the
battlefield there is written, "The army of God". On the banner of
the Thousand, "The wrath of God is kindled against Belial (Satan) and
all the men of his company without remnant". On the banner of the
Hundred, "All the might of battle against all wicked flesh comes from
God". Before the battle the High Priest encourages the troops: "Do
not be afraid, tremble not before them, do not give way", of the enemy
he says, "They are a gathering of wickedness, they work in darkness, and
their desire is for darkness". Finally he starts a war-song in which God
himself is called on, as a valiant champion, to defeat the enemy.
Was this only an eschatological picture, a collection of late Jewish
eschatological ideas? Though the form of words may have been determined by
the time in which they were written, the war of the divine forces against the
forces hostile to God is a reality, and Christ is involved in it. But Paul
was not merely filled with a conviction of victory like those Essene holy men
who cut themselves off from the rest of human society. He also saw the
outcome of the struggle as already decided by Christ and knew that in the
midst of this world he was protected by the love of Christ and God and proof
against all the powers of darkness. "But in all these things we
overcome, because of him that has loved us; for I am sure that neither death,
nor life, nor angels, nor principalities nor powers, nor things present, nor
things to come, nor might, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature,
shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus
our Lord" (Rom. 8:37-39). The last enemy to be annihilated will be the
power of death itself (1 Cor. 15:26) and then, at the general resurrection,
the victory of the risen Lord will be complete (1 Cor. 15:54f.). {287}
30. Conscience and its Formation as a Concern of St. Paul
PAUL was a Jew of the diaspora with a Jewish-Hellenistic upbringing,
and in his writings we encounter an idea which was to be full of significance
for Christian moral doctrine, the concept of conscience (suneidêsis).
In speaking of it he was, of course, only giving us a definite name for
something that had been known both to Old Testament Judaism and to Jesus. But the great apostle of the gentiles had many things to say about
conscience and the obligation it imposes that we do not yet hear in the
gospels. The growing recognition that a clear concept of conscience and the
cultivation and formation of this living witness, advocate and judge in our
own heart is very {288} important in moral education, gives increased relevance today
to Pauline doctrine. Yet we must be clear that the concept of suneidêsis;
in Paul is not yet or not yet entirely identical with what we call
"conscience".
i. The Concept of suneidêsis in Paul
The word suneidêsis is to be found twenty times in St. Paul
(five times in the pastoral epistles), as against only another ten times in the
rest of the New Testament (in Acts twice, Hebrews five times and 1 Peter
three times). In using it, Paul was taking up an idea which was frequently
used from the first century before Christ onwards in the Greek vernacular
(the koinê) and in Latin popular philosophical writings (conscientia). It was also familiar to Philo (to suneidos); but this Jew of
Alexandria adapted it to suit his belief in revelation and his personal
concept of God.
As it was used chiefly in popular ethics and not defined, we cannot expect
absolute clarity in its use. Thus there is no differentiation between
awareness of moral values and the actual function to which we might like to
restrict the term "conscience" nowadays. The characteristic mark of
this spiritual function is, of course, the personal and spontaneous reaction
before or after some moral decision; but awareness of moral values is, of
course, necessarily presupposed as its foundation. {289} But Paul seems to
have been more concerned, in accordance with the original, etymological sense
("to be conscious of something" — cf. 1 Cor. 4:4) with this latter,
although in fact at Romans 2:14f. he describes both the constitution and the
functioning of conscience. Furthermore at 1 Corinthians 8:7 ff. the apostle
writes partly of moral judgement (we notice the reference to
"knowledge"), and partly of the reaction to moral conduct, that is,
subsequent conscience (the conscience of the weak is "defiled").
The fundamental meaning, awareness, is more closely adhered to than
is usual with us, when St. Paul speaks of "commending ourselves to every
man's conscience in the sight of God" (2 Cor. 4:2) or when he hopes he
is "manifested" in the "consciences" of the Corinthians,
that is, that his uprightness may be discernible to them (2 Cor. 5:11). The
use of "for conscience's sake" as opposed to "for the sake of
wrath" (cf. Rom. 13:5), is a reference to awareness of moral
responsibility; and in 1 Corinthians 10:25, 27 and 28, Paul is thinking of
moral scruples.
Most often conscience is characterized as a "witness" (Rom.
2:15; 9:1; 2 Cor. 1:12); it accompanies our actions as an incorruptible
witness within us, and can also be called on to attest the truth of our
assertions. Subsequent conscience is probably what Paul is describing at Romans
2:15 c under the image of mutually accusing and defending thoughts (see
below).
It is noteworthy that such attributes as "a good
conscience" (1 Tim. 1:5 and 19; cf. Acts 23:1; Heb. 13:18; 1 Pet. 3:16
and 21), or "a pure conscience" (1 Tim. 3:9; 2 Tim. 1:5; and the
opposite at Tit. 1:15) are to be found only in the pastoral epistles, and
they are more firmly established in later writings. To say, as Dibelius did,
that this marked the appearance of an ideal of "middle-class
Christianity" is surely too harsh, yet it {290} cannot be denied that
this mode of expression does not appear in the earlier Pauline epistles.
Furthermore, there is also to be found in the pastoral epistles (which have
the cause of sound teaching very much at heart) another noteworthy feature:
conscience now stands generally like a watchful cherub before the portal of
the faith, before the temple of religious doctrinal truth.
ii. The Conscience as a Moral Endowment of all
Men
In the well-known text Romans 2:14f., St. Paul shows he is convinced
that "the Gentiles, who have not the law (of Moses), do by nature those
things (the commandments) that are of the law" and hence "are a law
to themselves". The next verse then seems to determine more precisely
how far they can do acts fulfilling the moral law without knowledge of the
written law: "They show the work of the law (that is, the acts demanded
by the written law) written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness
to them, and their thoughts between themselves accusing, or also defending,
one another." This text is usually quoted as the locus classicus
for the existence of a natural moral law which even the natural man can
observe. But this view must be qualified by certain exegetical reservations.
First it is clear from the context St. Paul certainly does not mean
to say that such moral behaviour is normal among pagans. The whole passage
Romans 1:18-3:20 serves rather to prove that "all have sinned and need
the glory of God" (3:23). Only a few lines earlier Paul says,
"Whosoever have sinned without the law, shall perish without the law;
and whosoever have sinned in the law, shall be judged by the law"
(2:12). And lastly v. 15 c also shows that the apostle was thinking more of
accusing than of defending voices. His reference to pagans who without
knowing the revealed law fulfil the commandments of the law, serves only to
show the emptiness of claims made by {291} the Jews on the grounds of their
possession and knowledge of the divine law "for not the hearers of the
law are just before God; but (only) the doers of the law shall be
justified" (2:13). Just as he did in connection with natural knowledge
of God, (l:19f.), Paul admits the possibility here that even heathens might
do good works on the basis of a natural knowledge of morality; but his
purpose is not to use the noble pagan to shame sinful Jews, but only to
destroy the Jew's pride in the law, his boasting about the revelation of the
law without actual fulfilment of its commandments. Just as he adds to his
acknowledgement of the fact of natural recognition of God the significant
clause "so that they are inexcusable", so too when thinking of
their moral judgement, he remained convinced that although they might do good
moral actions, they would no more be able than the Jews to withstand the
final judgement of God.
Hence St. Paul's "by nature" cannot simply be equated with
the moral lex naturalis, nor can this reference be seen as
straightforward adoption of Stoic teaching. The Stoic was so certain that the
lex naturalis was a part of human nature that he maintained that
everyone who recognized it could also live by it. That was definitely not St.
Paul's opinion. He uses the expression cpiicrst, in an unphilosophical,
popular sense, as meaning perhaps "by what you are, of yourselves". Thus the text does indeed
{292} say that pagans can do good acts (v. 14),
that they possess within themselves the capacity to do them (v. 15a), but not
that they are inclined to do them and are in fact people who, because of
this, will be able to stand at God's judgement.
On the other hand we should reject various interpretations which give
the text a completely different meaning, such as that suggested by Augustine,
and recently again by W. Mundle, K. Barth, and F. Flückiger, interpreting ethnê
as meaning gentile Christians. In verses 15-16 many scholars find a single
eschatological picture of the judgement. According to M. Lackmann the ergon
nomou is a successful concern for the law, from the human viewpoint,
which leaves its traces in the heart; but God will judge According to his own
knowledge of the heart of man and will not account such justification by
works as sufficient even from the heathen.
Even with these interpretations, however, the difficulties of the text do not
entirely vanish.
Admittedly in the traditional exegesis of the passage the reference to the
judgement at v. 16 gives an unexpected and disruptive effect; but perhaps
Paul wanted to return to the {293} theme of vv. 6-10, or perhaps the verse
should be thought of as a gloss.
In any case this passage bears witness to St. Paul's view, a view
perhaps not uninfluenced by Stoic thinking, but wholly translated into
Christian terms, that everyone possesses a faculty of making moral
judgements, and a conscience. If at the same time they are sinners who will
not be able to stand at the judgement of God, this fact supports Paul's
doctrine of justification: that there is only one way to salvation,
redemption by the blood of Jesus. Recognition of the good and occasional fine
actions are not enough to bring anyone to salvation. From this point of view
man's natural ability is j ust as weak (Rom. 8:3), just as impotent to give
life (Gal. 3:21) as the Mosaic law. Man's moral endowment assumes its true
worth only when he becomes a Christian, when the Holy Spirit lays hold of his
spirit and moves him to what is good.
That conscience is decisive for determining the moral quality of an
act, was another clear insight of St. Paul. Being a human being capable of
making mistakes, the Christian can find himself in inner conflicts. He may
still not have enough "knowledge" (gnôsis) and may think,
for example, that the meat offered for sale in the public markets, meat from
pagan sacrifices, is morally forbidden, although he should know that there
are no "gods" and there is nothing against the meat from the
sacrifices (cf. 1 Cor. 8:10). In Romans 14, Paul examines a similar problem.
In the Roman community there were many Christians who believed that the use
of meat and wine generally was forbidden (cf. vv. 2-21). Paul said that the
others, the "strong", were {294} right, that for Christians no food
is "unclean". At Colossae he censured more severely similar
opinions, because they were being spread by false teachers, and calls them
the "precepts of men", and a fall back into slavery to the
"elements of this world" (Col. 2:20ff.). Thus at Corinth and Rome
the "weak" were really deficient in knowledge and Christian
liberty. But if they had eaten things which, although mistakenly, they held
to be forbidden, they had "defiled" their consciences (1 Cor. 8:7).
The conclusion of these discussions in the Epistle to the Romans forms a
statement which is also a precept: "All that is not of faith is
sin" (14:23b). For moral theology this is a classical text demonstrating
that the conscience, even if it judges wrongly, is the ultimate and decisive
measure of morality. For biblical-theology it is also noteworthy that St.
Paul here uses the same word, mem?, as he uses elsewhere for belief, faith.
It is difficult to attribute a special sense to it here, for to St. Paul, faith is the whole attitude of the Christian,
assimilating his judgements of moral worth too. The Christian is not divided
within himself, with a natural economy and a supernatural one; there is only
one judgement of conscience, and it is determined by his belief.
In the discussion of the use of meat offered to idols St. Paul endeavours
to teach those members of the community at Corinth who are asserting their
liberty and boast of their knowledge, to be considerate towards the
"weak", not by external admonition but by giving
them a motive that will {295} touch their consciences. Such formation of conscience can only
be interpreted as an attempt to refine and elevate their moral values (not
the function of conscience as such), bringing them up to true Christian
standards. Fraternal love stands at the top of the list (cf. section 23). If
anyone who has full knowledge gives occasion, through his untroubled eating,
to one of the weak brethren to eat like him the meat of sacrifices made to
idols, and so defile his conscience, he should voluntarily renounce it.
Christian liberty must not be a cause of stumbling to other brethren (1 Cor.
8:9). "Through your knowledge (gnosis) shall the weak brother
perish, for whom Christ has died?" (1 Cor. 8:11). In the Epistle to the
Romans, St. Paul calls that frankly an offence against charity (14:15). Under
his frequently recurring image of the building he calls on all to put the
community before their own wishes: "Therefore let us follow after the
things that are of peace, and keep the things that are of edification, one
towards another" (14:19). This is the only reason why Christian liberty
is to be surrendered; the apostle expressly rejects the idea that those who
eat the sacrificial meat without scruples should allow themselves to be
changed by the condemnation of others (1 Cor. 10:29b-30). Paul therefore,
wants perfectly clear minds; but even more he wants loving hearts.
In other ways, too, this man, who was sometimes so impulsive himself,
tried to inculcate tact in the exercise of charity. With sensitive
consideration, he told his Philippians that he prayed their charity might
"more and more abound in knowledge and in all understanding" (Phil.
1:9). Probably he thought they still lacked proper harmony and selfless
humility in their dealings with one another (cf. 2:3ff.; 4:2). This was, moreover,
his constant concern, "Bearing with one another, and forgiving one
another, if any have complaint against another" (Col. 3:13; {296} cf.
Eph. 4:32). Sometimes he is even rather severe: "But if you bite and
devour one another, take heed you be not consumed of one another" (Gal.
5:15).
With such admonitions Paul was training Christian consciences, that
is, trying to make Christians clear-sighted and aware of true moral values.
This is clearly shown by his continual demand that they examine themselves (1
Cor. 11:28; 2 Cor. 13:5; Gal. 6:4) or seek the will of God (Rom. 12:2; Eph.
5:10), or again, weigh carefully what is in question (Phil. 1:10). He was not reintroducing the ideas of Jewish casuistry (cf. Rom.
2:18), but making Christian charity the key to knowledge, the sign pointing
the way to morally good behaviour. From this point of view, Augustine with
his advice, "Love and do what you will", follows and interprets
Paul perfectly. Christian liberty springs from charity and at the same time
bows under the light yoke of Christ.
31. The Moral Preaching of the Missionary to the Gentiles
{297} PAUL was called to be the apostle of the gentiles (Acts 9:15;
22:11; 26:17f.) and looked on himself as such (Gal. l:15f.; Rom. 1:5;
15:16,18). In discussions between him and the leaders of the Jerusalem
community, it was decided that Peter should undertake the mission to the Jews
and Paul the mission to the gentiles (Gal. 2:6-9). This man, on whom preaching
lay like a compulsion (1 Cor. 9:16), this prototype of the labourer and
soldier of Christ, knew only one method, that of being all things to all men,
a Jew to the Jews, a gentile to the gentiles (1 Cor. 9:20 ff.). We may,
therefore, ask how he himself, with his origins in the Judaism of the
diaspora, adapted his moral teaching to the requirements and understanding of
his non-Jewish hearers. Did he change his emphasis for these heirs of a
different spiritual outlook; Did he tone down many of the commandments for
these children of an easy-going world? Did he adopt some of the popular
material of the wandering pagan philosophers, or at least their way of
talking to ordinary people? The fresh, unsophisticated language of his
epistles, his lively interest in everything that concerned his young
communities, the profound seriousness of this preaching and, in addition, his
understanding of human weakness and vulnerability, give us insights it would
be difficult to find in a theoretical treatment of ethics. We can examine
only a few special questions here.
The first of Paul's epistles to the Churches which have come down to
us, the two Epistles to the Thessalonians, at once give us some indication of
the chief difficulties that the new Christians had to overcome in the moral
sphere. Sexual purity and honesty in business life are the most urgent moral
admonitions in these {298} epistles. Paul puts both before the Thessalonians
clearly as God's will (1 Thess. 4:3ff.). We have already noted the
instruction in chastity (see above, section 26,2). It is important that the
apostle requires something more from his hearers than pagan social or civic
morality. "Every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in
sanctification and honour, not in the passion of lust, like the Gentiles who
know not God" (w. 4-5). Whether "vessel" here refers to their
own bodies or to their wives (cf. 1 Pet. 3:7) has been disputed since ancient
times and can scarcely be determined with certainty. In the first case it
would have to be understood as meaning, "learn to control your own
body" and in the second, "possess your wife in sanctity and
honour". It is unlikely that the passage refers to contracting marriage,
for the apostle can hardly have been speaking to a limited circle of people.
Although in Rabbinic Judaism the expression "vessel" can be shown
to have been used for "wife", that was not the case in Hellenism.
Yet, gentile Christians must have been able to understand the expression in
this sense, as 1 Peter 3:7 shows. We must, therefore, leave the question
open.
Paul not only includes lasciviousness, "fornication", in
the traditional lists of vices: he also attacks it on his own account with
the strongest of Christian arguments (1 Cor. 6:12ff.; see above, section 28).
It is noteworthy that he speaks much more often of unchastity or fornication
(porneia) than of adultery (moicheia) ; probably because Christian demands {299}
went so much further than Stoic ethics. Frequenting of prostitutes and any
kind of illegitimate satisfaction of desire is bound gravely to endanger the
exclusive and close mystical relation of the Christian with the Lord (cf. 1
Cor. 6:17; 7:32ff.). Paul also urgently warns his readers against occasions
of debauchery, for example, feasting and drunkenness (Rom. 13:13; 1 Cor.
5:11; Gal. 5:21), and pagan idolatry (1 Cor. 10:7, 14-22; see also the lists
of vices at 1 Cor. 5:11; 6:9; Gal. 5:20).
Another important point in Pauline moral exhortation, was honesty in
everyday life; he sees avarice as another vice typical of the pagans and calls it "idolatry" (Col. 3:5; Eph. 5:5). Avarice can easily lead to falling away from the true God; that was the experience of
Judaism too.
Paul brought esteem for poverty, moderation and liberality with him from
Judaism, but he surely also knew Jesus' earnest words about the idol Mammon.
And he based his precept to give freely and cheerfully (2 Cor. 9:5-7) on
motives of his own, drawn from faith in Christ (2 Cor. 8:9; 9:8 ff.).
Envy and strife, anger and discord belonged to the pattern of general
Hellenistic moral teaching, but Paul was not satisfied merely to enumerate
them in the catalogue of vices. Because he had to fight hard against these
evils in his communities, he had a great deal to say about concord and love
in the {300} Lord, and adduces the highest motives (see sections 19 and 23
above).
Paul, then, accepted many things that were also taught by popular
ethics; we might also notice obedience to authority, family duties and duties
of state, the so-called household or domestic codes. But to what was often a
coin worn smooth, the Christian missionary frequently, though not always,
gave a new splendour. The method of presentation in popular instruction at
that time was anything butfaulty.lt was a lively style delighting in argument
and counter-argument, in replies to imaginary objections, exclamations,
direct address to the audience, and in changing from "I" to
"you" and from "we" to "you". St. Paul took
over this art of the diatribe as it was cultivated in Cynic and Stoic
popular philosophy, and it suited his scintillating mind, the compulsive
plenitude of his thought, his ability to adapt himself to the readers, with
whom he wanted to fall into "talk". In addition he used many
metaphors, especially from the life of business and the law courts, sport and
the army, but above all from everyday life. However, it cannot be denied that
his application of them is not always felicitous. At any rate Paul drew close
to his hearers and readers, and his gift of sympathy, his delicacy and his
ardent love for Christ and for them was more than enough to steady the
waverers (the Galatians, for example) and give a firm footing to those who
(like the Corinthians) were stumbling.
ii. The Motivation of his Demands
As the missionary to the gentiles, did Paul use, as well as the great
motives of God's saving work, communion with Christ, possession of the Spirit
and so on (see above, section 28), any special motives adapted to those who
had once been pagans? Generally speaking, the answer is no. He did not employ
two {301} levels of teaching, one for beginners, the other for
advanced students; at most some adaptation to his hearers' capacity to grasp
the truths of faith (cf. 1 Cor. 3:1ff.). He drew everyone immediately into
the soaring flight of his theology and sought to set them on fire with his
own love for Christ. The old sinful man is laid aside (Rom. 6:6); those who
belong to Christ have crucified their flesh, with its passions and lusts
(Gal. 5:24); the Christian who lives "above" with Christ, has left
his old vices on the earth, should mortify his sinful members (Col. 3:1-5);
everyone must be guiltless when the Lord comes (1 Cor. 1:8; Phil. 1:10). These
and other admonitions are addressed principally to gentile Christians.
It is, however, remarkable what a significant role the concept of
judgement played in missionary preaching to the gentiles. According to 1
Thessalonians 1:10, one of the principal points in their initial instruction
was "salvation from the wrath to come", and even in the actual
epistle Paul reminds the Thessalonians of this (vv. 5-6). But no one can say
that punishment by the gods in the world to come was a dominant concept in
Hellenism; the Epicureans and Stoics were at one in rejecting the concept of
the wrath of the gods. The common people did,
however, ascribe many chastisements in this world to angry gods, and ideas
about the judgement of the dead in the next world had become deeply rooted
through the Orphic religion and Platonic doctrines.
Paul was able to make
contact with these rationally weak but emotionally strong convictions and
announce the clear doctrine of Christian revelation. The pagan, too, could
and must use his sense of justice to understand what to Jewish theology was
axiomatic and what the early {302} Church firmly maintained: that at the end
of time, God will hold a strict judgement of reward and punishment over the
whole human race (cf. Acts 17:31). This was also a
topos in the Hellenistic-Jewish missionary preaching, although admittedly
more in the sense of punishment for the sinful human race.<
p> Such a powerful motive
was certainly not unsuitable in the face of pagan immorality; but it is only
the dark back-cloth to the message of salvation, that the gentiles, too, had
been "delivered from the power of darkness" (Col. 1:13) and become
"the children of light" (Eph. 5:8). Now they should no longer share
in the "unfruitful works of darkness", but should rather call
shameful things by their right names, and lead their pagan fellow-citizens to
the light of faith and salvation (cf. Eph. 5:3-17).
Sometimes St. Paul did not despise certain "natural"
motives. On occasion he turns to the unspoilt human being who felt the
hatefulness of vice and the humiliating tyranny of the passions. The Stoic
system of ethics, which praised virtue and moral freedom, duty fulfilled and
service to the community as a great happiness, had prepared the ground for
him in this. That age, not yet utterly depraved, found convincing an argument
that Paul had no doubt borrowed from the Judaism of the diaspora: that
unnatural vice was a degrading punishment from God on the heathen for their
sacrilegious idolatry (Rom. 1:21-27), and the abundance of vices a folly and
irrationality inflicted by God on these wicked people (1:28-31). This
description does not, {304} formulated in the schools and the popular form in
which its ideas were disseminated. Much was a part of the common stock of ideas
of the people living in Hellenistic cities, and it was this that St. Paul
seems to have taken up, although he himself had clearly had an education
above the average.
Attention has often been drawn to the concept of "what is
fitting" (to anêkon), used by St. Paul at Philemon 8; Colossians
3:18; and Ephesians 4:5. Closely related to this, is the concept of
"what is seemly" (Eph. 5:3) and the negative "what is
shameful" (Eph.5:12). The Stoa spoke of what
was "fitting" for human beings as the kathêkon, that is,
demands and actions arising for them from the claims of their environment,
and which critical reason shows to correspond to their nature.<
p> On the other hand with
Paul, the objective and highest standard was not "what is in accordance
with nature", but the will of God; consequently only genuine and moral
values are appropriate and becoming to the Christian. Thus formal concepts,
perhaps originally borrowed, receive new content.
Yet it remains doubtful whether Stoic ethics were the direct source
even of such ethical ideas. The Stoa did not term conduct contrary to what
was right ta mê kathêkonta, as Paul does at Romans 1:28, but para
to kathêkon. The word for "virtue", which is
found in only one Pauline text (Phil. 4:8), was in general use. It is
significant that Paul did not make more use of it, but left it to Christian
paraenesis after him. "The mark of Christian {305} ethics is not the
thought of the ideal (of virtue), but rather the thought that what is good,
is God's demand."
But in at least one text most scholars will acknowledge a concession
on Paul's part to the ethics of Stoicism, namely in Philippians 4:8. The list
here is terminologically colourful, containing some striking turns of phrase,
some of them used by Paul nowhere else; but it is not a catalogue of virtues
and does not lead the Christian to a civic ideal of virtue. Paul is rather
calling, in an emphatic way, on his correspondents to think about what is
good in itself and also enjoys a good name among men, and this for Christians
is the will of God (cf. Rom. 12:2). That this was his meaning is shown by the
following verse 9, where he recalls to the Philippians what they had learned
and seen embodied in the apostle. Elsewhere in this letter, of course, Paul
shows his readers a quite different goal: the heavenly vocation (3:12-14),
and a completely different picture of man: the man conformed to Christ
(3:10), who is to be made like his glorified Lord even externally, by the
power of God (3:21).
In that way a further important difference reveals itself. Paul is
not concerned with an ideal of perfect humanity and not with any idealistic
ethics at all. The Christian here on earth is to be bound to Christ and
conformed to him, but precisely by suffering with him in order one day to be
glorified with him. (Rom. 8:17); here we can still bear the image of the
earthly man, the first Adam, in order one day also to obtain the image of the
heavenly man, Christ, the second Adam (1 Cor. 15:49). It is true that even
now through God's gracious deed and our own moral effort, we are to "put
on the new man who is renewed unto (growing) knowledge According to the image
of him that created him" (Col. 3:10; cf. Eph. 4:24). The process of
moral development has a different ground and a different direction from any
humanitarian ethics; the guiding principle {306} is not the harmonious and
perfect personality but the divinely-willed image of man renewed by Christ
and brought to its eschatological accomplishment.
The terminology of the pastoral epistles, with its very great
differences from that of the main epistles and those of the captivity,
presents a special problem. It is characterized by specially selected, more
rarely used words, and in the lists of qualifications for those seeking
office in the Church (1 Tim. 3:2ff. and 8ff; 5:9f.; Titus l:7f.), and the
admonitions for the various states of life (1 Tim. 2:8ff.; 5:3ff.; Titus
2:1ff.) comes much closer to the language of Hellenistic ethics. As this
problem, however, is very closely bound up with the question of authorship
and the circumstances of its composition, we cannot discuss it here.
It is clear that
on the whole the motives of popular ethics had "only a very limited
significance" in Pauline moral exhortation and the concepts that sound
similar were "mostly only formal borrowings from the formulae and
vocabulary of rhetoric, almost always demonstrably filled with a new content
and Christian ideas". Hence it cannot be maintained that the missionary
to the gentiles came down to the level of his hearers and curtailed the
commandments; on the contrary, he wanted to bring them mature and
irreproachable to meet the Lord.
| 
These Courses