ABSTRACT

A RHETORICAL STUDY OF CERTAIN PAULINE ADDRESSES

by Desmond Ford

This study examines seven typical discourses of the Apostle

Paulunalnely 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians,

Philippians. and Philemon. As addresses conceived to meet emergency

situations, and being originally read aloud to Christian congregations
as public speeches, these epistles are rhetorical rather than literary
in nature, and have been analyzed as such according to the appropriate
classical canons .

Chapters one and two sketch time-and—place factors, with Special
emphasis upon the main currents of first century thought in the realms
of government, philosophy, ethics, religion, and education. In the
third and fourth chapters, the life and influence of the Apostle are

reviewed; and specific attention is paid to the factors which shaped

Pauline oratory. The analyses of the discourses according to standard

criteria of invention and arrangement constitute chapter five, while

consideration of Paul's style is reserved for the chapter which then

follows. Because a primary objective of the investigation has been to

 

evaluate Paul's manifestation of ethos, and to compare it with the ethos

 

recommended by recent homiletic theory, an entire chapter, the

seventh, has been devoted to this phase of the study. Chapter eight is

an inquiry into the relevance of Paul's ethical values for modern

communication, and the concluding chapter summarizes the foregoing

and evaluates Paul's contribution to rhetoric.

.
no. .-o--.W ‘9 .a'

.. ‘
A. _,... ‘.-...-.ao¢ 0-0 '- '
. .
. I . -
by- 3- by ‘g.
._... I ,“. \.‘.-a no
. . .
'.',.. .. 0.... p ”o 'o- '
...._.....l u... .e:... o ---oo:
. .

 

   

 

   
   
   
    
    

 

. b; . .n. .‘F‘ -‘~
" "l-l n1...‘. “log y.
’ o
I -
O.
I -. ,..
o. '
I‘IO. fl-..:\t.'
... .UQ
_ F o O .
~.-~ ‘ . .9
“ aobau.."..? .
n
m- --
'¢ 'v~s . ._ .=
.~ . -
OI-J‘v.| ’0‘.
- to... -..,_.
.
‘
.. . .
I. '. - ‘ y.
‘ it «.. h
""o..
-L ‘ To...» ;‘ . .
‘ u-o~‘ .v I
It.» ‘
"\
9‘ I .
.~~‘-~....‘ ._ .
s... .‘n.....9a.
. ..
u
o- .u
. 4. 7 -.
‘\“H-.. ‘ "..v0.
' \‘e..«.\ "
:4..__.

 

 

 

Desmond Ford

The aIlalyses revealed that while Paul was too much of an
individualist to conform in every way to the patterns of presentation
recommended by the classical rhetoricians, on the whole his discourses
do exemplify the chief requirements of Attic oratory. The epistles
show the Apostle to have been resourceful in invention, with the evi-

dences of his logical and psychological powers manifest in each

address. It is, however, in his revelation of ethos that we find Paul's

distinguishing characteristic. He ever conveyed himself, not ideas

merely. Probably no other discourses of antiquity or modern times
are so reflective of the competence, virtue, and affections of the

orator concerned as the Pauline epistles. The Apostle thus exemplifies

both the modern homiletic stress on the preacher's incarnation of truth,
and Quintilian' s conception of the "good" orator. It is in this exemplifi-
cation of the ancient classical dictum and the modern homiletic concept

that the Apostle' s chief contribution to rhetoric consists. He reminds

us anew that "as a rule we trust men of probity more, and more quickly,
about things in general, while on points outside the realm of exact
knowledge, where Opinion is divided, we trust them absolutely. "

The consideration of the ethical decline in major areas of modern
communication also suggested that the ethical factors which enabled
Paul in a morally degenerate age to influence beneficially his own
world and all subsequent culture are urgently required by our own

civilization if modern communication is not to duplicate certain unsavory

trends of the Sophistic tradition.

Copyright by
DESMOND FORD
1961

c.--.-.0PI' P’..T,.
I . ..
.-.-«u~".~ V.“ '

.-'

v-
I
.,
A "
‘1‘:-
f.
\
gm
\'l.~'..
oateeol“;
I e _
...:~"~"~ " "
._...G. .i- C '-
‘aooho
' I
.'.. .
.4. o
r ~
Doc - :-
.V.\

4).
“v-
'0
a

1": b. o
O I.

 

A RHETORICAL STUDY OF CERTAIN PAULINE ADDRESSES

By

Desmond Ford

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Speech

1960

Of all the men of the first century, incomparably the most
influential was the Apostle Paul.

No one man exercised
anything like so much power as he did in molding the future

of the Empire. . . . Had it not been for Paul--if one may
guess at What might have been--no man would now remember
Greek and Roman civilization. . . . Barbarism proved too
powerful for the Graeco-Roman civilization unaided by the

new religious bond; and every channel through which that
civilization was preserved, or interest in it maintained,

either is now or has been in some essential part of its
course Christian after the Pauline form.

(emphasis ours)
William M.Ramsay, Pauline and Other Studies, pp. 53, 100

What they [Cicero and Demosthenes] lacked was not

yet revealed--the higher reaches of ethics and a more
comprehensive kindness.

"Oratory, " The New International Encyclopaedia, Vol. XVII.

ii

 

 

 

' “0"
A. . \
.a -0'
o - .
_ _ - '-
D‘ It". "r‘ o
.u. ..n--. s \' " '
.
.
.I
.
.._v-o:.;~.;n._ ."r o
"--¢~‘s..oon. a...» o
.
. .,,_ _ - .
.,' .~._~'..O~n.. 3'
-I~~..-.-....... .go“ :0 -
.
_-... ... .‘ _
.-- .ap-m .c .' .--
‘n '0»-..\ J‘sxb a.
.
.
\‘ ' I - n
o J, . v
.‘°""‘ 'IOM-u-: $1.. -....
0 -a‘. .
"F o .
o. o .- ... l
V... I
”*0 I04 \ .. 4.
v.
. "o .... -
'-—-.' "‘5 4"" ".
‘ . "‘~- I... O.‘- .'
-
vu
to ' u
o
‘ .
...
_ f
. .
'U 4.
_ . .._ h
.....':

Q
. d h-
”. o‘ht)~«;.‘:(‘ r
‘

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The writer owes an incalculable debt to Dr. Kenneth G. Hance
whose kindly and scholarly counsels throughout classwork and
research have made "the rough places plain. " His untiring guidance
and encouragement matched the theme of the study in rendering the
penning of these pages an enjoyable and rewarding task.

Special thanks are due to Dr. David C. Ralph and Dr. Richard
E. Sullivan who, in conjunction with Dr. Hanc e, reviewed this manu-
script in process and made valuable suggestions.

In addition, the following instructors are gratefully mentioned
as the sources of inspiration which contributed to the development
of the following study--Dr. Gordon L. Thomas, Dr. Donald H. Ecroyd,
Dr. Frederick G. Alexander, and Dr. Petr B. Fischer.

>:< >§< 2:: >:< X: >,'< 9,: >‘,< >1: >{c >:< >}<

iii

 

. 'I
. I.
I.
a... n
.~;O
._-...
~-"‘OIF-."‘I
' \
b--~---doo‘ru . O I
. ..-.----—\ ”9. 0‘ ...
“d . ' n w“
d...- _..~~ v... . ..-
- .c ' .
;.. :' .. . .
“" c..vo.o.~~.. . .
-k - ' u -
-" ‘;’r>.‘ nus 0..
'_‘"'V‘O‘ oa ....,
.
u .—
~v O...
P v
e.. s... “-
‘ '~
- - .
l. ‘ 4 --". -
”““' " v. ‘.
-..--
g. A... “'0“ ..
-u on. . '_. \.
¢_.,,. .
-I~0 5. .'..- L...

.' \ h *‘01.
.._ v. C V.
0....- ...\'H .
‘ -
‘s . l?\o‘\ """/\..
-----~ l‘: .fl" \ .. ‘
‘~o. ‘.
V I‘II-
A..-
.‘—. ' or... .‘ . .
"an .
.0Ho.\,..~ .M--‘ .‘k
n..-
\ q."\‘v~-
7‘
s
\
‘3
\

 

\
‘ ‘-
\,, \ .r.
'..'l0u“
'.I --.3 . .‘.
. u .
. ."‘:) PF ‘.r
.\‘,' IV J...
1.“. '
“I.
C
. a
. C
N. . .
‘ - o
0
‘1
Q . .
. .

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapte 1‘

INTRODUCTION.............. .......
THE WORLD OF PAUL'S DAY ....... . .....

The Historical Background to the First Century A. D.

PhiIOSOphy in the Graeco-Roman World . . . . . . .

Religion in the Graeco-Roman World . . . . . .
Morals of Graeco-Roman Society . . . ..... . .
11. ' THE ERA OF THE SECOND SOPHISTIC. ........
III. SKETCH OF THE LIFE AND INFLUENCE OF THE
APOSTLE PAUL O O O O O O O O C O O O O O .....
IV. ELEMENTS WHICH SHAPED THE ORATORY OF PAUL
V. THE CRITICAL ANALYSES OF SEVEN PAULINE
DISCOURSES.................... .
First Discourse to the Christians at Thessalonica .
Second Discourse to the Christians at Thessalonica.
The First Discourse to the Corinthians ......
The Second Discourse to the Corinthians . . . . . .
The Discourse to the Galatians . . . . . . . . . . .
The Discourse to the Philippians . . . . . . . .
The Discourse to Philemon and the Church at His
House..................... ..
VI. THE STYLE OF THE DISCOURSES . . . . . . . . . . .
VII. PAULINE ETHOS COMPARED WITH THE ETHOS OF
LATE AMERICAN PREACHING THEORY . .....
VIII. THE RELEVANCE OF PAULINE ETHICS FOR
MODERN COMMUNICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . .
IX. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS. . . ........ . .
APPENDIX C O I O O 'O O O O O O O O I I O O O O ........

BIBLIOGRAPHY .......

,iv

1
26
44
63

75

96
107

120

123
137
143
188
251
332
373

406

433

453
493
517
531

 

 

 

VITA

The writer was born at Townsville, Queensland, Australia
on February 2-. 1929. High School requirements were completed
in Sydney, New South Wales, in 1943, and for three years there-
after positions in the Composing and Editorial departments of
Associated NewsPapers, Sydney, were filled. In 1947, the writer
decided to train for the Ministry and Spent the next four years at
the Australasian Missionary College, New South Wales. From
1950 to 1957, he was engaged in evangelistic and pastoral ministry,
and then returned to the Australasian Missionary College to com-
plete the B. A. degree. This was followed by the M. A. at
Potomac University, Washington, D. C. In 1959, studies for the
Ph. D. were begun at Michigan State University.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.‘ '
o-‘ I '
' ' -s r..-
' -. ..-.' ‘ '
D . .- O
- o -a.
‘ A . p.
t. ' ‘O _
. 0-..—. .X .
. ' -.‘-¢ uv-o
.. . -. _
.. 1.. .- ‘
.m... 3". . . -‘-
"‘ .. u..- .-.-...
g
. o A
- v.0p. ~.;. .. ' ..
. p T i I.
'*‘ on .u; ..a--
’ I
' ' v. . u 0-. . _ _. -.
r... v- .-
r... z....-- .,, M. ‘
I. — " ' a- n
i -. 9°. _
\--. 1.. v I
o
u . . .. .
H .. h .' I'u' '- l
~.d-.....g_.. .. '
n_ . '
. . . .... A .. .‘ .
H i . I. J. v- v-
.5. ‘-.“"‘“¢-- .- . o
‘ I
t‘...,
' ‘I .
x . ' .-° v‘o .
. J
\-. -..~. -.¢._.: . ‘
“‘Vb n
" .‘ ..A
h - ‘ o --
.. .- -‘ .
I..-“ nus-Q -.:.0\' O . ‘.
. . .
. ...
.-‘. :__ -. h-“ r.-
it‘. qq.|-O‘....I 5
,.. .
"x. n'o’ 7-. .’_
- I..n.5~‘ VI ~‘.', ~
"Q.
a.,-_- a.-o,_. ..
, ~ ‘ .‘ I
oo.._. _.-“‘; “.'
-_ .
.. . .
.,_
t. I.
oi‘ . x 'D go..-
-o.\_
C ‘ .
Che
. ¢
‘ .“'.. ‘ .
. ..‘ .. 4 O
“.5 ”J; «C o .' .0
~o e...'.
' t
\' "FA
. ‘-:._‘- v.-.‘ :
~\..
U». V. S J O.
.._
‘
‘.‘~ V
- .-
..-.“: ‘I-..t .. .
wen-‘~ . _.q"
o ..‘..
‘

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION

1. The Title of the Study:

 

"A Rhetorical Study of Certain Pauline Addresses'l

II. Purpose and Justification of the Study:

 

One of the most well-known orators of the ancient world is also
the least studied for his art. While the public speaking of the Apostle
Paul was largely re3ponsible for the spread of those values which
have moulded much of Western thought, the man himself has been
virtually disregarded from the standpoint of rhetoric. It should be
remembered that orators such as Augustine, Luther, Wesley, and
others began their careers as a result of insPiration from the words
of Paul, and the homiletics of almost twenty centuries has been con-
siderably influenced by the same source. While numerous literary
and Speech critics have asserted that Paul's mind was "eminently
oratorical, "1 study concentrated on this aspect of the man has been
Slight, deSpite the fact that, as we Shall see later, we have highly
reliable transcripts of some of Paul's addresses--conceivably more
accurate transcripts than we have of men such as Chatham, Sheridan,
and Fox.

At this juncture it Should be pointed out that we are not limited
to the Six Speeches of the Apostle recorded in Acts for Specimens of
Paul's oratory. Most of his epistles are public addresses which he

desired to be delivered to specific church audiences. They were

 

1John Franklin Genung, A Guidebook to the Biblical Literature
(Boston: Ginn and Company, 1919), p. 623.

 

vi

 

 

 

 

. u. , ,
- .Q' .4," 4t ‘
-' ‘ -o 0'
. ‘ 4U . o
.‘ .
o
- a»
__,.....o-.-ju . ,
"' . .o ‘9' _. _- . .
‘ I-J
.....~o—-I
‘ o
. l
. I I- _
I . ;;— T. J.» out I. A
q...-o —-..—‘O
.
-O .5
' 4" O
h .. ...- .
~. .-.-.
or ‘ V‘ o
. ,-o -O -
.s s V« b
...- .‘nu-.-o u. . 0.. .
» . o . .
"v'.- :0. '-_ 0 . '0.
—. «Q ..'.s 0. no.- 0
' cu .
-~-. I -.
". u. ‘
hud-“O loo‘i . 4‘. g V‘_
-I I,
H
V ‘ -
v
A
"‘ '— ~n. .
‘ "' t " . '9'
.-. s..-..__ _ I..
n
. .
o n
. _ ..
.., ,... . . .
-!
I .
‘ - ' ." v
.c... ... .‘.‘V t . .
.., v
\ ‘1‘ -n .__ 1
" x—. ‘ u.“ ..
.. ~.""‘lo
O ‘ ‘ .
o.._‘- .
- .._
m..‘ IF 7‘ -.
" '°’~a. w... I
. I
, l
" -., _
. ~ '_
" v--..~ :‘ b i "
Q .4 .. .
I
. -._ z
‘. V
" --.f_ g'“ n - '
, .a..‘\ ‘-..
. ,..
..._
.D
‘u' .1. I
‘. ..
\a,_ b A’"‘ .
l‘~““ " ...‘ '.
‘I I. I
.
...
, ‘;.. ~ 1 .
'.. p. ' .
' 0.... . .
- ."a, y\‘ ‘
A a

 

 

 

 

never intended by Paul as "literature. " To him, their sole purpose
was persuasion towards certain courses of action in order that local

exigencies might be met. I It is this fact that explains why Paul used

Koiné Greek instead of the classical Greek of literature. 2

This custom of Paul's [dictating] is not without significance
for the style of his letters. In reading them we must bear
in mind that Paul usually, perhaps always, Spoke these
sentences aloud, and that they were intended to be read
aloud in the assembly of the church. . . . Hence the kernel
of the epistles to the churches consists of a Speech by the
Apostle. . . .

Thus in many reSpects the style of the Pauline letters
is that of spoken language. . . . But there was not lacking
the conventional correctness which was to be found in any
case of public Speech in Greek. . . .3

The concept which conceives of some materials as being ”rhetorical"
(rather than literary) irreSpective of their status as written or spoken

is not new. The following is an attempt to define a Speech as a literary

form.

A speech as a literary form then is a prose composition of
varying length, fashioned for a specific or generic audience,
usually but not necessarily spoken and listened to, written
or recorded in some way on brain, paper, or tape for
permanence, in which are inter-related author, reading or
listening audience, theme and occasion; it has ethical appeal

- and universality, moving force and fluency, its design is
artistic and its purpose is to direct the reader or listener to
a conclusion selected by the composer.

Isocrates' Areopagiticus was not delivered, was not

 

1Adolf Gustav Deissman, Paul; A Study in Social and Religious

History, trans. William E. Wilson (New York: Harper, 1957), pp.
8, 13.

2Kathleen E. Innes, The Bible as Literature (London: J. Cape,
1930), p. 281.

3Thomas S. Kepler, Contemporary Thinking About Paul
(New York: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, 1950), p. 178.

vii

 

 

 

 

 

 

.‘ ‘ .. -
.. ‘ .
. r n.-
0" ‘. ~‘ -t.o
-4-4
.--'
.0 .
..-o
. ‘ ‘
. If»...
u. ..¢.
- o
-O '
\..".
‘ .u. I o
o 0 ' "
l -
.. -o I v -‘ u". -
;' - , . k. . o-
_._,—....-I-
' O
-- ~.--' -:°. 4
Al O .u A u
90...... p“‘
, _
' . .0 o
. .- . ~-
..¢..I . o 5 ....... I. -
-. ...-‘~.c' -"
.
' 'o-. W. -‘ ” . ..
.>0 0 v 9 ‘-
ud...s.-oo---¢
.-c- a-o . I o .
.l .. , 0-. _o
...\.‘.._.-. no.co a a
., ..- -- , .0
' ' 'rtu (\ 0
<--.o--n..., . . .
. .. . I ...
'u.olv'l n .. .
“'I"-“' I.‘ ’I v...
vi .. '
o
. 0’ vs
' Us A as.
..
'._
" ~ 0.
~o o
__.. ‘t " '0‘.
..n o- .,_
‘ .
O. .- pi .‘
o.__, '- v‘ 3 .-
. v; I‘.fl .: .I- a
o
I‘ ,
—
‘ " a " 9 a
'I. Q
nae"... ‘. .. . '0
é“;—o '
-._-
~--, .
n. 0‘ 51“. .\ _I‘ ..
I - . ' u
'- ."' U- .
- -H- .‘ I u “.
'O. ' n
. -..
..__ -
4. ...e U ~ .
u . ,
Q
o
‘
-
'p'o-c.
... ’ .
'“‘ ~.." . r _.
'io.‘.‘ \ I‘
‘ows...0
I .
s. I
.-". - _ .
.Og‘I'.‘ ' _’_ .
' -_..3. pg ..,
. '-~ It
'DQ
.v-n .
' In
"‘.t .5" 0., '5
'1“ ‘9‘. .
.H " ‘ 9
‘0».

 

 

intended to be delivered, but it has served as a model Speech
for 2300 years.

. . . Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, when under con-
sideration for censure by the Senate, released a speech which
was front-paged across the country. He was so busy he did
not actually speak it but had it ”inserted in the RECORD. "1

We are reminded also that Wilbur Gilman analyzed Six of
Milton's tractates and found that they had "all the elements of a
delivered address, except delivery itself."

In Herbert A. Wichelns' article "The Literary Criticism of
Oratory" we read as follows:

If now we turn to rhetorical criticism . . . we find that its
point of view is patently single. It is not concerned with
permanence, nor yet with beauty. It is concerned with

effect. It regards a Speech as a communication to a specific
audience and holds its business to be the analysis and appreci-
ation of the orator's method of imparting his ideas to his
hearers.2

The criteria Specified in these quotations are fully met by cer-
tain of Paul's epistles, which originated in the desire, not of adding
to literature, but to influence specific groups of peOple in emergency
situations.
There are certain characteristics which make the Pauline
records of more than ordinary interest to students of oratory, eSpecially

in these days when the Special study of ethos seems to be looming

 

larger than ever in the minds of many Speech critics.
1. It is likely that the Pauline epistles contain the best example

of ethos in all ancient oratory. No Speech records extant present a

 

Similar interweaving of the personality of the source. Commentator

 

1Richard Murphy, "The Speech as a Literary Genre, "
Quarterly Journal of Speech, XLIV (April, 1958), p. 119.

 

2Studies in Rhetoric and Public Speaking in Honor of James A.
Winans (New York: The Century Co., 1925), p. 2.09.

 

viii

 

 

o .
o a ,.--
_ o _
...--""-'{,35-" .
..: ,_._~- .
4 ' .
. I | . .O‘
. . ' . ‘..o'~_‘ .. -
on a' " ‘..v ‘
, a
. .-
,.- .0 D' ". i'. 3 a
. ... -
_..- .. fi““”.
3 1:
.....~.
.
. -- o
., . "‘t’ '0‘ _.
_. .fl-‘LOI 'L‘-‘ ‘ I
n. u. -..-a"" - ti.
w.A .o- v -o d t,
u...... u... o\'—“
. 0
. . - - 0 ~
. ."' ‘ ’y u a“
on. . ....-e. c. “0‘ H‘ r.
x.
- r
-. ".I‘.;;‘DI-..h ‘ .9 -.
'-~-.....n.-. snao~ ‘-'
-.
..- -O .
-\5 '“o .0. o h. -'
'I n~~uu I..~.n-u4~O-- '
‘- -
‘ 1 . .
“":. V I I .,|I
' --..‘ .4. 5‘ o ... u
.
.v
i u
no.
,.
‘0.
I-
II I
I‘.
x.‘ .n .. ._
‘s. ’ '
~-.-..| 4 E s ’
u
. - VJ‘. ..
~.
‘ u-o ‘
. ‘ 'I .
. ...... 3,": " s" .
. - .“ ..I.L
.
.~
.\ .“ n... ' \ .
‘--'f.:\" 0...
\ . ‘°'-oo a... _ ‘
O
‘n.' -
-- .
5-. .
hu 0 .
. . .-
..“““‘-.«.. ‘t.o.,
.
‘ .
.—.
-1 -'.'..‘ -o '
~.'\~ H :v ‘ O
- .nJu 4"
a. "4"
D
l

 

0"
.l
‘3.
I ‘-
.0 "
.Qtlm... ‘

O
‘..

 

 

 

after commentator remarks at the way in which Paul delivers himself
rather than merely a message.

2. It is also likely that in Paul we have one of the best available
illustrations of Quintilian's Ideal Orator—-"A Good man skilled in
speaking. "

3. Though these records come from the age of the Second
Sophistic, they reveal a style entirely different from that which was
characteristic of the age. On this ground alone it is interesting to
seek the reason for this divergence from the norm of that day.

4. These materials are also distinctive in that they reveal a
unique blending of two rhetorical cultures, the Greek and the Hebraic.

5. Furthermore, these addresses of Paul contain many Signifi-
cant references to speech which have influenced the attitudes and
values of many orators since his time.

6. That Speech style which concentrates on matter rather than
f2_r__m, and yet which frequently soars into sublime expression finds
abundant illustration here.

Paul does not always follow orthodox rhetorical method but his
procedures can be evaluated only when his particular objectives are
taken into account. About thirty years ago in discussing the theory of
George Campbell, William P. Sandford declared that the former's
concept of Speech ends,

with its inevitable corollary that the means by which the orator
Shall accomplish his purpose must differ according to the nature
of the effect desired, and that whatever material is introduced

into the speech must be judged according to its 'subserviency or
want of subserviency to that end'. . . .1

 

lWilliam P. Sandford, English Theories of Public Address, 1530-
1828, p. 146, cited by Lester Thonssen and A. Craig Baird, Speech
Criticism (New York: The Ronald Press Co., 1948), p. 135.

 

 

ix

 

 

_ e
.-
,'It
.. v.
r a
' c
.0'0 '
....,.-._ ‘ ....' 3..
‘. ‘e... solo-‘90
. o ‘
.. - -—o-

' . a a... P
.o o- —o v ou-D\-I-

.. . . ..

_.. - au- ‘0‘
‘~.,. e...a¢ 05“-
"...."; :U ,‘.
h.u~.‘..., ,. g
‘ .
'-' .. e ,
.. "- ‘9-

‘”‘I .. Loos

 

 

 

 

‘bv '
.n: .‘I.
-- ,

3‘ h
.- .
e... ,
b
I.
-~ _.';. .
-..
u
n
. ‘
~ a '-n _
'p.‘ h
. "'~

.
o
.
.. o
0- 0 '
.-
." 9-.
no. . -
‘. ‘-
.. a
3n- 0 .
.‘O’l I K
- U

on .
. w.’ ' ,.
O ‘flbc-o\.
'- .
n. g .
e-...s ,.f~f '
.-
._
.gyo-Q .‘ .
-~s... ‘_.U 1
o

. -' III-
" ‘Joo\.‘
_ .

v v-
H
\..c.‘
a.'
b . ‘
.‘jg *.‘.v
“e.
iii.“ _
b
\n J.e

 

 

 

Sandford asserts that this 'Strikes the keynote of modern
theories of Speech composition.’ Probably it was this thought that
inspired the dissertation of John G. Rudin entitled "The Concept of
Ethos in Late American Preaching. " Here it is indicated that preach-

ing differs from secular Speaking in its added emphasis upon ethos.

 

Rudin asserts, for example, that the preaching theory which he is
studying embodies the concept that truth Should be conveyed not only
by logic but by what he terms 'incarnation. '1 Every reader of the
epistles of Paul ultimately becomes aware that this concept of preach-
ing is strongly Pauline.

While Rudin's dissertation dealt with late American homiletical
theory this present work aims at giving emphasis to the same concept

of ethos but this time illustrating from the opposite end of the era.

 

Concerning the conclusions of Rudin we might ask--Are they true of
preaching in general, or only of pulpit artistry in recent decades ?
The earliest preacher who could possibly be studied to test the matter
is the Apostle we are considering. As Wild has pointed out, Paul is
the only Biblical writer to employ the Greek rhetorical mode. 2

The present dissertation analyzes certain of the Pauline epistles
with the Specific purpose in mind of discovering whether this ancient
preaching was Similar to or different from that which is required by
the modern homiletical theory studied by Rudin. An attempt is made
to ascertain whether those attributes of preaching iInplicit in the body
of homiletic theory surveyed by the recent investigator are also

present and to a similar degree in the preaching of the first Christian

 

1John G. Rudin, "The Concept of Ethos in Late American Preach-
ing" (unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Dept. of Speech, Northwestern
University), p. 471.

zLaura H. Wild, A Literary Guide to the Bible (New York:
George H. Doran Company, 1922), p. 265.

 

X

 

 

 

 

 

_ O
.-.'- '"- I. '.'..'-.
9':. "-.‘.- V
# D. ‘. - l '
. -0 ‘ '
cg" 'V. U; n
. 0“. .u- v-““'
_‘ .
.
.. o- - ~-‘ " "
"'1" ¢~ f, ...n.A- "
~..n... -0
'
.. .e.- b;‘ 10
a . .

——~...—. h‘461'.. b.

erv'. ;;on~y.> ‘ ~'

—.. .;-r.‘n. .o-VI-O '.

’ “ ‘v

9‘..v.-,;.‘ .. v; c '9‘

-.-..... co. 1. . 'l‘o v I

.
.-pc-.... ’5'. ‘ ,‘ . .
.0.-..... .c’ . ..... .
n .
.. . ,. __ ‘ .
---- .‘h‘ v t- s -
........,a me C' . .

". ‘

I 0".I - r -_

. a I’

‘ b. ._ ..,. 0-5 "‘"
h . . ‘ ‘ l~
-~-'; '0', 0
-’ ““‘-s tone ..1.

I." D -.
9-...) u.- .—o ., h. -
54- ..\‘.‘ ... .
e
-9 'l t
l”-‘- ..
.. .
O‘ '
‘~ I ' I
o., ‘
,,.~ 4 ‘9‘. n- .
l ""‘cn.. . I 5 .
o
u
o.._ -
‘o.‘."-‘ Ns- ; -
.‘a.. . n
.. 4‘ .. 3..»
I I
.
‘9. . .
. ‘.
'-~...: 3 J ‘.‘. 0...,
. .
v“. ‘e...'_
I
-. .
‘.~"' a-
‘-..3. ff‘- 0.. C I
. ‘3... .‘L .
r, -
T. r. .' o '
M. F " o '
~ A_ “a t- .. g. .
" ‘QO

 

 

minister. to employ Greek rhetorical forms. If such is the case, it

will have been demonstrated that the concept of ethos discussed by

 

.Rudin applies to a much broader field than merely late American

homiletical theory. Likewise, the whole question of ethos, its

 

importance and method, should have some further light cast upon it
by the analysis of Paul's rhetorical practices.

Furthermore, some recent writings on speech criticism have
stressed anew the ethics involved in the Speech Situation. For example,
when Edwin Black discussed Plato's emphasis on morality in public
Speaking, he made the following significant statement.

When in recent history we find the clamorous Spirit of
fanaticism at large in the world sustained by rhetorical dis-
course; when we contemplate the undiminished and undiminish-
ing potentiality for savagery latent in all men, waiting to be
triggered by suasive language; and when we observe the
Sophists of our time, rationally discredited but thriving still,
we may begin to suspect that after all Plato was even wiser
than we had thought. 1

Inasmuch as Paul, more than any other, was reSponsible for the
proPagation to the western world of the values referred to above, it
cannot but be profitable to examine at the source this speaker's own

concepts regarding communication and the values inevitably associated

with it .

Summary of Objective S

 

The objectives of the present study are:
To study Paul's rhetorical method from certain of his epistles.
To examine particularly the ethical proof which seems to

dominate his addresses.

 

lEdwin Black, "Plato's View of Rhetoric, " Quarterly Journal
of Speech, XLIV (December 1958), p. 374.

 

 

xi

v - v I...

'. .-~-;v; ’,. I

‘0. .005 0":

....---.‘

o
..,..-.--

.‘.~ 4

-DU‘p-.‘O-nl.

' I

.

............ .. 0,. ‘ ‘
9‘:
.e ..’——.....C so. moon. I
, . . -.-
-\ , g ‘0 p
-.4’. I..-CI u vI'
.

. i O o
' b 0 w|‘- - _
| ~ - . p ’

n:oo--.o.....,, g.

-.. _ ._
' 4‘ u " ,
‘ "’l‘-~.de.. __. .“
o
. u
.- 0. _. ‘._ .
u 8’ r . . ‘-
.— -~o..~ d._ ‘.
~- . v
'_..r O . .
t. u- , -~,_.t ..- ‘ p. . '
- u... '_‘ ‘
" a. ...,_
.IJ."‘ :' o- " ‘0‘ no 7
e.-.... ‘.. ' .
"' v
. ..‘Q ~-
0 .
‘l "s.- '.-- P... 0-. n
‘ .“.‘. oer,

 

 

. o
u
- ,_ ~ _ _
-‘ 'do~._t‘§ .- o
. II.
.'O Q
—. " l'.l'_ ' _ .
‘~ .‘ N ‘ Us
0. ‘ ,0 u.
‘ .‘o . _ -
,~~
. .‘
~N.: -‘ . " '
L....|. . .., ‘ '
‘ ‘ ..u 3
_a
‘\" ‘.C
~ . .
n.4'.-..-Iu- .
‘~.. .v ..
...__‘ ‘H C' e
e.. ‘
o
‘s. S s.
u .-
-....':.: Q .

 

 

4
‘
a... ‘5
' o
.. ‘ u
"‘ J': ‘ge‘e- .
.sL.‘ 1 .
‘ 'u
I.
K::
.,. '
0.,
‘
“at ,
\k.
‘1
.
a
" I .-
~-..
--_‘:..."l..
-v-
.I‘ 0‘. .
-
“I
i
v

04‘ .'
.‘.'Ib..a‘-
0. ..=..Q*'...
‘ .‘.o.-
.:1"--'..
“\h .
I

 

 

 

 

To compare the former with the conclusions of Rudin in his

dissertation.

To examine in this situation Quintilian's concept of the orator

as "a good man Skilled in Speaking. "

To substantiate or otherwise from this Pauline study the case

for emphasis on ethics in communication.

Only those epistles which the majority of modern critics acknowl-
edge as Pauline have been considered, and from among these there
have been selected those addressed to Specific audiences in answer to
some local problem. The first criterion eliminated Hebrews and
Colossians; and the second negated the use of Romans, Ephesians, and
the pastoral epistles. Romans is more in the nature of a treatise and
bears none of the usual marks of urgent composition in response to a
local emergency. Many scholars hold that Ephesians was more in the
nature of a circular letter as it contains no personal allusions whatever
to the members of a distinct congregation. The pastoral letters were
not intended to be read aloud to a group. Rather, they contain personal
counsel to ministerial friends. The following remain as subjects for
study.

'Galatians--written to reclaim churchmembers who were back-
Sliding into a Judaizing heresy.

l CorinthianS--written to rebuke schism and irregularities in
church procedure.

2 Corinthians--written to defend Paul's apostolic authority
against the slanders of false teachers.

Philemon--written on behalf of a runaway slave to the church
group meeting at the home of the Slave-owner.

l ThessalonianS--written to encourage those who, while antici-
pating Christ's soon return, had been saddened by the
death of friends.

xii

g

. -;; - ‘. to.“ . ,
.. _..
v- _..o
I--" ‘
.
..... -‘V .
F '......Q —
._.... -
O "m-
... o- a-
. .
I
'- . . n. O. .-
-° - 5...-...‘ ’ I
.-_e¢4l“i
e.. a- - o .4 o .
to“... yae4ao .
.
0 ~ .
. - - -cp.
o ‘-’u‘-P r"
.-.u‘..u‘b .5 ‘-ou -
- ... .u... -. e .
' .r v
~vv.---‘o4.4t .
o
I‘ C
.r. .o .
v e
"' ' to t. -
. 4
‘" '--- a. ...t 2 ' . .-
o
“‘ ”c...
"‘b-o. .‘ ‘..
U
-.
I ._ ,
. 'd' ~ .. " -
.' n...” . O-
A “ I -¢.
u- -, .
~.,.: -’ 0' O. 9'-
ubqn.§ ‘. ‘..C v.
voo‘,
£:-... ~ .
" . fi‘. .
-.. u : E ‘. ... .
. O
0
g.
i". ,
~.C,-‘. g-.. _
"t a. ,
~ __“ a ..;v‘ o I
-.e.,
.~';°..
4 '». u
‘.-‘v.‘. u."- ..
‘ngi. .0 ‘0
o... ._
D
.-
e., .g I
‘~ ‘ ..
O.“.l *- 4
‘.‘-.— - ..
o.‘ .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 Thessalonians--written to rebuke those who had forsaken
their normal occupations on the assumption that Christ
was soon to appear.

Philippians--written to give thanks for gifts sent to him in prison
and to plead for unity and steadfastness in the church.

The average length of these epistles is such that about half an
hour would be required to read aloud to a congregation a typical Pauline
message. Only Philemon falls much below this, and 1 Corinthians at
the other 'end of the scale would constitute an address approximately

one hour in length.

Materials and Sources

 

The writings of Paul as translated in various versions and with
some reference to the original Koiné Greek forms have been the basic
sources for this study. In addition, all available commentaries on
Paul's letters and a number of recognized works of rhetorical theory
have been consulted. Historical texts have been used to provide further
background materials, and Rudin's dissertation "The Concept of Ethos
in Later American Preaching" served to provide comparison for
certain a8pects of the investigation.

It will be noticed that there is no lengthy consideration of the
question of textual problems. Such an omission does not imply that
such problems are non-existent in this instance, but rather that they
are so slight as to be insignificant for our purposes. The following
quotations are pertinent:

. . . let us notice what a favorable position is occupied by the
New Testament in comparison with other authors of antiquity.
The New Testament writings are separated from their earliest
manuscript by about 200 years. Virgil is next with an interval
of about 350 years; Livy has 500 years; Terence, 700; Horace,
900; Demosthenes, 1200; Plato, 1300; while the great Greek
dramatists have an interval of 1400 years or more. Then again,
consider the number of extant manuscripts. There is only one

xiii

extant copy of the Greek Anthology; the plays of Aeschylus sur-
vive in only fifty manuscripts, none of which is complete; those
of Sophocles, in about a hundred; Euripides, Cicero, Virgil,
and some of the others have several hundred. But when we
come to the New Testament, we find 4000 extant manuscripts

of all or parts of it in the Greek, to say nothing of 10, 000 c0pies
of a translation of it into Latin and numerous manuscripts of
translations into other languages.1

The proportion of words virtually accepted on all hands as
raised above doubt is very great, not less, on a rough compu-
tation, then seven- eighthsd the whole. The remaining eighth,
therefore, formed in great part by changes of order and other
comparative trivialities, constitute the whole area of criticism.
If the principles followed in this edition are sound, this area
may be very greatly reduced. . . . setting aside differences of
orthography, the words in our Opinion still subject to doubt only
make up about one-sixtieth of the whole New Testament. In this
second estimate the proportion of comparatively trivial variations
is beyond measure larger than in the former; so that the amount
of what can in any sense be called substantial variation is but a
small residuary variation, and can hardly form more than a
thousandth part of the entire text.z (emphasis ours)

 

 

Organization

 

The setting of Pauline oratory (time and place factors) is dis-
cussed in an overall view of life in the first century of our era. Such
is the content of chapters one and two. The Specific background of
each discourse, however, is presented with the correSponding rhetorical

analysis in chapter five.

 

1Samuel A. Cartledge, A Conservative Introduction to the New
Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1951), p. 19.

 

 

ZWestcott and Hort, The New Testament in the Original Greek,
Vol. II, p. 2, cited by Cartledge, p. 21.

Since these statements were made, New Testament criticism has
advanced still further. The distance now separating the original New
Testament from the earliest fragmentary MS available is less than half
a century.

 

xiv

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o
.
Z. ‘0 .p.: BL“.
3!.....---
~ I
u v . .
..

- -o i!" n ...'
..:..’ » ..".
""-' o. s-' ‘

,....v .4
..
. U
. o- .
.., .nn.' "n‘ .’
-‘ .¢.ou o
i D. C... I.
._._.n.
. .
“ ‘-"~'.,.‘ 0' o,
. C to
I. \Ql‘.‘ulb v
.

. . " .
-.'...;..n- .‘..'
§.o~.«.;..‘ neg..-

s .

“"o - b
.‘.. ..
---. t‘ , ,
I ’ ‘ U .9 u
' . v; ’ ,. ‘
.v‘...‘.. M. ‘CI. ~ 0
.
‘ -’ -.b. . . I,

' ..\-.p '. ‘ *

--.¢c..,._.‘..‘b. .
.
’u, ,. .-
‘. A! a
‘u..; '-
""o....
' -
.
' . ‘
;-.-. g '. .
nus-n... -.¢§n-‘ \"‘n '0‘.
. 0
*.b‘
- ‘ I. 4 o..
run. J. ‘ . '. ‘-
. ou<.r.‘....L ‘.‘-
‘b.
. ___ '.
"t-~o
~.-.,:. . P 't. ~
. ....,. . . “..
‘\I_
.v- .
‘ h. v ‘
. u . .
u... .4 O. ‘

E5pnt.“ c.. 9'

n.
. . .
. .. ‘.. _
.‘ "a- .. O
o ' '
C
.‘; ;-
. .
..~.H.t W! 3.. .
“.49..,

 

 

Between these sections of history and the case studies has been
placed a view of the Apostle in the light of succeeding centuries, and
a summary of the main influences which shaped his oratory. Such is
the content of chapters three and four. Because references to style
would be largely duplicative if placed under each epistle, a separate
chapter has been reserved for the detailed consideration of this canon.
Other objectives of the study are fulfilled in chapters seven and eight,

which deal re3pectively with Pauline ethos as compared with that of

 

recent homiletic theory and the relevance of Pauline ethics for modern
communication.

In the closing chapter an endeavor is made to draw the strands
together by indicating the significance of the investigation as a whole. _
It is inquired whether Pauline oratory has some significance for
rhetoric in general, and secondly whether it has particular significance
for that branch of oratory, known as preaching, and finally, whether

there are some implications for the general field of communication.

XV

 

... .. _ I
0-0.4 _ n
. o- A '
. " '. r~_ . ~.
.--...s»..- -. g - ~
. I .
o .
,..
\ ' ‘
' o
O‘-- .v.~ . ‘It ‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

.
-:' ‘I«~o"'.' 0
Ju .....,. .3
. ‘J
. . ‘
- 1" --I.
. Q
.., v . ‘ . -
‘ so
.0 u‘.’ E ‘ .9‘5‘ ‘2‘
u
._ '. 3
. ‘CG-
. _ ' '
ill. 0 L...... .'
.
u. 0-. . .
‘ r
.- .". 0‘ 9
c ya...‘ -..
._. O
.
\.: .. ‘- .
u....-.':‘ *F‘ .O'v .
. .. . ‘
.'"...._ ,
'\._‘ H o.. .
‘c. I. c ,' ._ . .
N ~.c~~

 

CHAPTER I
THE WORLD OF PAUL'S DAY

The Historical Background to the First Century A. D.

It is impossible to view the first century of our era, or any
other century, by itself. Like every point in time and event in space
it is sequential, a harvest as well as a sowing, consequential as well
as causal.

By 14 A. D. civilization had described a semi-circle. Beginning
somewhere in the Fertile Crescent, later manifested in the Aegean
islands, it moved westward to the Eur0pean continent. Greece became
the fountain of the classical tradition which was to help mold the thought
and life of the West for all succeeding centuries. The age of Augustus
saw the peak of classical civilization, the zenith of attainment of the
ideals of Pericles, Aristotle, Plato, and Alexander. Undeniably,
Roman culture was essentially Greek. The Romans usually implemented
rather than invented, and this proved particularly true of their culture.
To begin to understand the scene in the Roman Empire, therefore, it
is vital to trace, cursorily at least, the outlines of the immediately
preceding centuries with particular reference to Hellenic and Hellenistic
thought which became the inheritance of the Latin conquerors of the
Mediterranean.

Five hundred years before Christ, the Athenian Greek represented
the appearance of a new human type. The flowering simultaneously of

genius and democracy brought forth the fruit of Humanism, which is the

 

 

. ..-t.- -0 ‘* '
"' "‘ - I . ‘ u‘ ..... .
.' ;_ :..--.s at
-_,.o--
~ l ‘

. . .0 - o- . '.
...._o~' . fl. tgv,~- ..
._...... u... r.

. a .
,. o.:..~-O vorv-_O-
9
,J’.:. -. "'.". v. non-on ~
g
.
_..;......-..u I.V -V"‘ ,
-.~o.-.-‘Ju ‘00!— “u? n
6 I
, . O
.. ._
. o“ 9. I.. “V ._q.'
u.......o._.‘ ._ d.... _
7;‘~—_--c; ‘ r .. ~
->~...¢ -.c‘ J-.- t.-.. .1
u . - .
., a...“ ...’..,‘ .. v o ' .
Mg...“ n_.| _.~ .“.
" I. ‘
. ..
fl .
.a........' .“L ..¢-., .
c
.
.l I-
‘fi. V
“I: .4'3 'u- .’.
,..- . '
. “ ‘at k... z
-.
t- _
0‘: '.. :.‘O, .
'0.‘ c " .
"“35 *.;- '.
‘ .Ia
"-Al.‘
"‘a..'\ _
.‘ u»... ’ .b-‘g - .'
"--~-.t'. .
.1
‘c-
'2» ‘ ..
\.\“‘~. ~.
"“0 h . v
a.. ~‘. ...
-.
‘~.. ."q . . ‘

"N ra-

4‘ G“ 03. '- . O
. - ""~oo ‘
’C

 

 

4,..-

 

 

chief characteristic of what we call Classicism. The Greek shook

off the shackles of subservience to the hierarchy of superstition, and
asserted the right of man to frame his own destiny. Most Athenians
refused to accept the pessimistic determinism of some of the Sophists,
and chose rather to believe that man could, by balanced personal
development and bold endeavor, mold his environment aright. While
in religion they were far behind the monotheistic Jews, in every other
aSpect of culture the Greeks transcended their contemporaries.

We think and feel differently because of what a little Greek

town did during a century or two, twenty-four hundred years
ago. What was then produced of art and of thought has never
been surpassed and very rarely equalled, and the stamp of it
is upon all the art and all the thought of the Western world. 1

The city state was the cell and microcosm of ancient Greek life.
Here it was demonstrated, before Aristotle wrote it, that ”man is a
political animal. ” The Greeks were the first to understand the meaning
of citizenship, and each of the institutions of the city state spelled out
the reSponsibility of every free Greek to participate in city life. The
contribution of every man's best, the act of participation in civic
activity, would lead to the betterment of all and the flowering of in-
dividual abilities. A great cr0p of brilliant literature, art, and archi-
tecture bore testimony to the apparent accuracy of this philosophy.
The names of Pindar, Aeschylus, SoPhocles, Euripides, AristOphanes,
Herodotus, Thucydides, Anaxagoras, Democritus, Hippocrates,
Protagoras, do not all stem from Athens, but each is representative of
the Greek genius which contributed to Western thought. DeSpite the
glory and success here suggested, however, there existed in Greek

thought a fundamental concept which invited disaster.

 

lEdith Hamilton, The Greek Way to Western Civilization
(New York: The New American Library of World Literature, Inc. ,

1959), p. 70

 

. ‘0
" .-
_... Ky .-.
r. J. -
to...
A ' . 1.

, . A. - ... -
.‘wuo u... .~ ”-
.000‘ 0-H“

-- - o"
o A -1» 0" '
.u. d...-‘ ‘ -o p
.

 

 

 

 

 

 

" "u- .. ‘ .
- o .- .
*-.... O .1
-' ”t Dob...:s _. ..
-t
. .._ .
o-fi ‘ n V
‘ ‘a-Iqu
I
IOQY‘vq , .. .
~c. ' ‘ ..
“ n... .u ‘.c‘ ‘0 0..
I..
.‘ :uo. _
. u... .
. .....:.,‘.t.\ 1‘ . '.
- a
L-
‘s“: _' .‘
n.__ a e . .. '
Id..‘.. “of w . ‘
r-ool. 6-.
‘D
F‘ ‘ .
- i-. .
s,“ .~ 9.2" _ ‘
'“*‘D:-'{ .u-r 0'.
. _. V is
a
0.. .
Hit R- "' '
yvtot._l". I
-. .,-
'0 ‘
5. ~ .
s..'. O. .-- .
"IJ . r ‘ ‘
'0. .‘\g.-' u
w,
w.
‘Hl.. ..L- .' u
I-. n I
' ‘\ A. -‘ .0.
" J. . 1" v-
“‘ \. I.
x o o
~\.‘.~‘ ..‘. o ‘
“o A.... 1’.
' .4.
‘ .1.

 

The basic flaw of Classicism was made manifest in the anti-
climax of Greek history which succeeded the glories of Marathon and
Salamis. The bloody Peloponnesian wars, and the prolonged disorders
which followed, demonstrated that man, for all his brilliance, was
not such a creature who could be governed by pure reason. The Greeks,
who prided themselves on their sense, were never sufficiently rational .
to establish a lasting unity among themselves. While the Hellenes were,
for the most part, linked by the common bonds of ancestry, religion,
and culture, the forces of disruption were ever stronger than those of
centralization. The spirit of rivalry and separation, although illogical
to the extreme in view of their common Greek problems, overwhelmed
the weaker tendencies to agreement and unity. Pericles had been
responsible for the political, economic, and cultural aggression of
Athens which had provoked the fear and hate of other Greeks. During
his leadership the political center of gravity was transferred from the
Council of 500 to the Assembly. From this time the Magistrates merely
discharged the will of the ever variable Assembly. It is to this deteriora-
tion in the final form of her democracy that Athens owed her failure
and fall. The menace of imperial Athens was one of the causes for the
Greek failure to create a form of government which could reconcile
the peculiar characteristics of the nation with the conditions necessary
for the continued existence of a powerful state.

The fourth century contrasted unfavourably with the preceding.

No real civic discipline existed, and the preference for the interest of
the majority was a thing of the past. A levelling tendency, with its
consequent fomenting of suSpicion and hasty, cruel action, prevailed.
Socrates was one who fell before the tyrannous Spirit which had resulted
from failure, fear, and panic. The race for money and power, begun

in the Periclean Age, was now accelerated; and the ancient Athenian

o
-..o-..'l ,- 0 c w- ..
-‘ " allot... can -..~—

“..~...o.-:.

. . .
. ..-. q. .. -.‘ ' .
" v s
g—n—‘o- Ito-govt. --.oibs o

r I .
.q~ .
‘0. ' b’.‘ .
o n.‘\ “C. ‘ I‘.

 

 

.
"" ‘ »o a .
' . ’9-
uu-o‘..., J. . ‘.
r. ’. . -. O .-

 

- r...

 

0 - ..-- ‘4'.'~
.. ~-~-‘-_‘ .. . .
.
"'~ . ' ~ .
~--. ' "F .".'s " ‘I .
...-... I‘D. ‘.~..
. ‘ .
~ .
‘
" D.
' u..., ._ .
‘- ~‘ “A. ’. ' 0‘
.. o- .' .. .. ‘

 

 

u" a
‘.-.‘.
“-‘ . v. .
_. w ‘
no...,“”‘. .
.0. :-
~ I I.
\—
.r .
‘ I .‘ u
«u. - h. .
il ’- .- _
I - vwé‘: O ..'.
u..\ . -I
.

 

 

values disintegrated for many. A bureaucracy replaced democracy.
Economic decline, social tension, intellectual confusion, sophistry,
and intercity strife have been rightly labelled as the characteristics
of the fourth century in Greece.

In the Spirit of reaction and disillusionment, there arose some
new political and philosophical schemes. A new Panhellenism, for
example, was espoused and promulgated by Isocrates particularly.

He incorporated the distinguishing ideals of Hellenism into an educational
system which was to train many of the world's thinkers for at least two
millenniums. Plato also had lived through the tragedy of the Pe10pon-
nesian wars. He hated the democracy which had brought strife to
Greece, and the Sophists who had set up false ideals. He put in writing
the idealism of Socrates as elaborated, and at least partly transformed,

by his own thinking. In The Republic Plato pictured the model-state as

 

one ruled by a philosopher-king. In his System of philosophy he

rebelled against such teachings as those of Heraclitus,‘ that all things

are in a continual flux, and he protested also against the dictum of

Protagoras, that man is the measure of all things. Aristotle, Plato's

successor, never entirely freed himself from the idealism of his teacher,

but his own writings were more scientific than metaphysical. The

scientific examination of life gave Aristotle the basis for his own system

of metaphysics. He believed in a teleological view of life with God as

the great overall End or objective. 1
Philip of Macedon, an enthusiastic admirer of Greek civilization,

had seen the necessity for unity of government, and he had implemented

this belief in his own country. Philip and Isocrates were in touch with

one another through correspondence. The latter wrote to the king urging

the necessity for the unification of all Greek cities. "As a lover of

 

1Plato and Aristotle are discussed in the section on Philosophy.

   

 

“" tv
'-
ou'
. .
0

. - 9' 0' “
_,...-.o"-‘O " ‘ ‘- ‘ p;
'. .,‘..~‘o s-.. - -
‘ I

q. .- a30- uu-‘o ’

i

. _ a -
~45" “' 'r-r " ‘.
.u.» . .4000. “a s». y

u - .
- - - .g.
1.00 a .V; -." ‘
.-.»..- ~-

.-.0.H"
-

:" -\-.-O.-.O Op-A

 

 

 

-
\
h. ..\.-' .-.¢s u... -
.
‘O -o‘ ... p-n-u .
. . , _ _ ..
" ..¢.I \vv-nJau » .
o
v . . '
. .. . _ .
.IQ' ‘- H. n ‘ -
0" “~‘ v. 5 h..." u -
O o
I
In
V. ' ‘
~... . .
~._;‘_ s ,. ‘9'. a ' ..
3" 0'».JS. . . ‘
‘ I
> s
u.
---o..'. .
c.
tr... -0
a.» g. h
. ;‘-.... .
“"- h' to” "a .. r' ‘
' .‘oa '
. ct. I. __._.§

 

.
.. _
‘§| :0 ‘0‘,
.‘ o. .“5‘ -..-‘. .v
~ 6.L“ In...
In
\. ..
‘h- I" 5.- ' ~
‘. " -~.‘ "4." .u'.
' “\on' . \ (I s.
s
"V‘Aq
.',, _
“u ‘u.. . ‘ . .
.
-.. D: ,_ .. ._ . .
on. - ‘. fi ‘
9-,.
lo.
‘\ .
._ “s _
.. . .
'J. I‘:'- ‘ v ~
~.. .-
~_‘Q:, I- ..
SA.,_
»,
,. .
. .I
I“ - 'u ' .
‘~..~c Rh. .:
too... O-.. .-'

 

 

 

a
.3 .
“N . ..
. “A 1‘,“-
2‘\~. "tr, '7‘“ ‘
Hana" A .‘e '. _
‘¢

Athens, he begged Philip to be friendly with that great city; if they
worked together they could extend Greek culture over the world. "1

. . . Philip had introduced Greek culture into his country.
Guests from Greece and other countries found the royal Court
at Pella, his capital, conducted with so much dignity, style
and luxury that the social life and manners of the Macedonian
aristocracy compared favorably with those of Athens. 7‘

The rise of Philip's son was also the rise of Plato's philosopher-
king. Reared under the tutelage of Aristotle, nourished on Homer,
and sharing ‘his father's admiration of Hellenism, Alexander went forth
as a reincarnated Achilles to conquer the world and bless it with the
legacy of Hellenism. He it was who was largely responsible for the
Hellenistic age with its welding of Greek and oriental thought. He was
not only one of the great military geniuses of all times, but due to the
influences of his father's court he was also a missionary of the Hellenes.
While it cannot be held that Alexander was entirely responsible for the
spread of Greek ideas, his conquest gave an impetus to the eXpansion of
Greek influence which for centuries had been under way.

"AS the pioneer of Hellenic cultivation, " wrote Edward
Freeman, "he became in the end the pioneer of Christianity";
. . . "the victories of Christian Emperors, the teaching of
Christian Fathers, the abiding life of the tongue and arts of
Greece far beyond the limits of old Hellas, perhaps the endurance
of Greek nationality down to our own times, all Sprang from the
triumphs of Alexander. "3

This founder of a new civilization was the ideal ruler as far as

the following centuries were concerned--a superman who could through

 

1Agnes Savill, Alexander the Great and His Time (London:
Rockcliff Publishing Corporation, 1955), p. 5.

zIbid.

3T. R. Glover, The World of the New Testament (New York:
The Macmillan Company, 1931), p. 57.

 

 

-—A.

out..-«

~

m

,.. -u»
,.....

 

oo-

"_~~-~

 
 

 

 

r

.,‘

g.

.3
a:

.3.
.o -

 

his ability and virtue solve the problem of disunity and create a peace-
ful world.

. . . Alexander is one of the supreme fertilizing forces of history.
He lifts the world into new habits of mind and brings in a new
epoch. He gives Science and civilization a new Sc0pe. . . .
Incidentally, he gave Greece a new Speech, for the koiné is the
outcome of his blending all Greek breeds and dialects in a new
distribution over a wider world. He brings in also the craving

for a new Spiritual unity. The ideal city- state was still of interest
to his teacher--a curious illustration of the detachment of the
academic mind; for, while Aristotle speculated, Alexander was

in fact so acting as to change the face of the world and to make

the city- state a mere anachronism; and the King was providing
that stimulus from the actual world which prompted the Stoic to
conceive of another ideal state altogether the cosmos, the city of
Zeus, the greatest conceivable unity of all. Two of the chief of
Alexander's thoughts survive to this day--the divine kingship seen
in Caesar and POpe; and that universalism in thought, philosoPhy
and religion, which we meet first in Stoicism and then in our own
religion. 1

Ta'rnhas made a similar summary regarding the influence of Alexander:

. . . , whatever else he was, he was one of the supreme
fertilising forces of history. He lifted the civilised world out of
one groove and set it in another; he started a new epoch; nothing
could again be as it had been. He greatly enlarged the bounds of
knowledge and of human endeavour, and gave to Greek science
and Greek civilisation a sc0pe and an opportunity such as they
had never yet possessed. Particularism was replaced by the
idea of the 'inhabited world', the common possession of civilised
men; trade and commerce were internationalised, and the
'inhabited world' bound together by a network both of new routes
and cities, and of common interests. Greek culture, heretofore
practically confined to Greeks, Spread throughout that world;
and for the use of its inhabitants, in place of the many dialects of
Greece, there grew up the form of Greek known as the koiné,

the 'common Speech.' The Greece that taught Rome was the
Hellenistic world which Alexander made: the old Greece counted
for little till modern scholars re-created Periclean Athens.

So far as the modern world derives its civilisation from Greece,
it largely owes it to Alexander that it had the opportunity. If he

 

 

1Glover, ibid., pp. 62-64.

....
u “Ishu‘QHKICOO‘. a
.

......-,--0-~'*

 

 

. . . .
-—...- --.;. . 4. o...
.
.—..¢. .¢. ~o...¢ J. n... -
.

v .

. I ,

;.v‘u.- .0 - '- .. .‘ 2

--‘---v v. .Q‘ba a..‘-.. .
.

 

"- °._;‘; .‘éuv .-— .-
...... m... k. v. -s- .-
- n
‘
-DD~~ I n . . - .
- . a as u- t .
h-‘l .nuu .b u- .5.
".h .- uO . .
u... as K ‘... l "‘
O
' ca... 0.
.. ‘ 1 ‘ ’ - ' ‘
' ‘“ '0 Colvscb. so .1 .

‘u; .. ‘ .4.

A .. .
~.-..~. fl .,_ *a‘? .
--.. _,

. .‘ n~ ».
o»...- .g-.. g..“ ‘-
l
. ‘r
.‘h. ““'-‘...|.. '
. '\

5 .4
'~"‘ ‘0‘....\

‘5

 

 

 

could not fuse races, he transcended the national State; and to
transcend national States meant to transcend national cults; men
came to feel after the unity which must lie beneath the various
religions. Outwardly, this unity was ultimately satisfied in the
official worship of the Roman Emperor, which derived from the
worship of Alexander after his death; but beside this external
form there grew up in men's hearts the longing for a true Spiritual
unity. And it was Alexander who created the medium in which the
idea, when it came, was to Spread. For it was due to him that
Greek civilisation penetrated western Asia; and even if much of
the actual work was done by his successors, he broke the path;
without him they would not have been. Consequently, when at

last Christianity showed the way to that Spiritual unity after which
men were feeling, there was ready to hand a medium for the new
religion to Spread in, the common Hellenistic civilisation of the
'inhabited world'; without that, the conquests made by Christianity
might have been as slow and difficult as they became when the
bounds of that common civilisation were overpassed.

But if the things he did were great, one thing he dreamt was
greater. We may put it that he found the Ideal State of Aristotle,
and substituted the Ideal State of Zeno. It was not merely that
he overthrew the narrow restraints of the former, and, in place
of limiting men by their Opportunity, created Opportunities ade-
quate for men in a world where none need be a pauper and
restrictions on population were meaningless. Aristotle's State
had still cared nothing for humanity outside its own borders; the
stranger must still be a serf or an enemy. Alexander changed all
that. When he declared that all men were alike sons of one Father,
and when at Opis he prayed that Macedonians and Persians might
be partners in the commonwealth and that the peoples of his world
might live1 in harmony and in unity of heart and mind, he pro-
claimed for the first time the unity and brotherhood of mankind. 1

With the passing of Alexander, the chief bond of his empire was
dissolved. His own strong person had been the guarantee of international
unity. Contesting generals now warred for over a score of years until
a settlement of a kind had been reached with Antigonus I occupying the

Greek peninsula, Ptolemy inheriting Egypt, and Seleucus taking over

 

1W. W. Tarn, Alexander the Great (Cambridge: University Press,
1951), pp. 145, 147.

 

-4

 

-.: n. ._
- a o a
- -o..o..¢-
n .., ..
r :-
In. .I ,-

 

. Io. ,..‘ .-
“ " \v " . .
..- . .n-..-m..‘. ‘_... | 2.
l'-‘ . .
. - ._ ‘ ‘
"“‘~- " " ‘r- 5‘
I. ~-.'.-_'.-II.

 

 

 

"I
(l'
“I
t!
' 7

 

most of the eastern part of the empire. While Alexander's asPirations
were given partial reality in the history of his immediate survivors by
the wideSpread nature of Hellenistic civilisation, the constant strife of
the years following his death demonstrated that the world was still with-
out the key to universal peace and orderly government. The Empire of
the Romans was to fulfill this need. The seat of world power which had
long been in the Orient was to shift to EurOpe, where the concepts of
the world's essential unity and the value of the individual were to find

their mature expression.
Rise of Rome and Its Empire

The rise of the Roman Empire seems almost accidental. Certainly
there was no imperial vision among the early Latins, and control of the
world came almost as a Shock to the citizens on the Tiber. One of the
miracles of the ages is the skillful reconstruction of social processes
accomplished by the Romans in the first century in order successfully
to cope with their unanticipated inheritance. Before discussing the
idealistic motivation which led to this reconstruction, we would briefly
trace the rise to supremacy of this ancient pe0ple.

When Greek civilization reached its peak, the Romans were still
leading a tribal life. Probably it was contact with the early Greek
colonists and traders which awakened the Latins. In the fifth century B. C.'
occurred a conflict Similar to that which had tranSpired previously
between the commoners and the aristocrats of Athens, and which had
resulted in the adopting of the laws of Draco and Solon. The Romans
also received a written code of laws, and the ordinary freeman found a
form of representation in the person of the tribune. It Should ever be
remembered that Rome from an early age diSplayed considerable gift

for government. The citadel of that name had in early times offered

' ~o
.. .,...-.«.r‘.- o ‘ '-
-‘ ..l
‘ ' :..,....‘...‘ W:
.‘. ¢ -
.
.- 'w; 3;..r v.
. a ‘
'Jut. uu.‘o'b '3‘. "' ° ’
. Q
.
-. . _ .
-. . ...‘ ,~. ‘1 '
a...” not". ‘.-..,- s -
~. . . . . ’. .
'. .u n. ‘ I ‘ v

'-
.. ,. . H ,
I. u-I ~ .
s.-—-o gooasauov. 0‘ ' '
I 0
-.-.;....‘«a . ,. .. o,
K-II ~..u ea ....\0 no .-
V' a
" :..;O .’ -..- - ..
9-5 .A..l . ‘QI\ \ ---I
'
..- . . -
'U'. . .
, o'- ..
‘~.v ' “" ‘ . T
a u..- ‘IC‘I4\‘.- ,. I,
.
u - ‘
" -I . . -
-.~:.. " P‘u ' ‘
"‘ ‘A05 5 ..

 

 

 

., -
. '. .pfip.I ". I.' ._
".II“‘~ k... . .
'-~'
‘~: '_ ."‘.~ -.
.. "‘w-C . .
a
'L .
i . -
_ -
"a D..
Q -
'n. 1 .— ... I
h’"" J‘. 4"!
Vu.,..I .
L
'-
.,‘
-
I.
un-Q-L' .‘Q
"‘- ' n I .
-v' G '
O o
.." ‘ Q. .

 

 

 

 

I
1". l I
‘.":t-F 3" fl
- .
. ' '- .
l 1-..,6‘“ .0 -'_I
Q ...
.__II
"l h. I . ‘
..'::\ J. ‘u. 5.
. ~‘ ,. fix
.Ag.. :J .
“~
I.‘-
._ h.-.
._‘:I.: o. P
a u,
h CJ,.:...r‘.. v-
- . ,
‘Z‘Ln .-
L
0
‘~ I
‘:‘ A."‘.~‘- ‘ ‘
ti.‘kfl 3‘. ’\
a
‘ \
. .‘ “"of‘
‘
..‘.3_ ‘
“‘- 1r 1‘
I ~ ’uI.‘ .
... . :J"
\'a I A
U‘ .
“I, a-" .
.. 1 ..-
‘ ' 3.” ; .
.~ ' -~ "
. ,I . a.
5 ;
\' "‘ § .
5’.“ 30 P
‘ ‘ 'V'v- -
\J.."‘ .
A “ Q’V-I I
L-
‘.-.. ‘ - ..
\‘u 'b.

 

refuge to surrounding Latin tribes in times of crisis, and eventually
thelatter became partners with the Roman citizens in a common
republic. Thus, almost from the beginning, it seemed to be Rome's
foreign policy to accept aliens on near equal terms. Through the pur-
suit of this principle, Rome had unified the whole of Italy by 264 B. C.
when her first conflict with Carthage began.

The great Punic commercial center of North Africa saw in Rome
a rival for the markets of Sicily and the southern coasts of France.
The result of the ensuing conflict of twenty-four years' duration was
the defeat of Carthage and the addition of Sicily to Rome's possessions.
In the very nature of things it seemed that one power or the other must
be eradicated from the scene, and two subsequent wars in 218-201 and
149-146 wiped out Carthage and left Rome as the supreme power of the
West.

Between 200 and 146 B. C. the remnants of Alexander's great
empire had come largely under Roman control. When Hannibal sought
the aid of the kings of Macedonia and Syria, he paved the way for the
ultimate absorption of these territories by his enemies. Syrian armies
were defeated by Roman arms near Magnesia about forty years before
the outbreak of the Third Punic War, and Asia Minor became a Roman
protectorate in consequence. After the third Macedonian War, that
country was divided by Rome into four independent republics, and
Illyria into three. In Egypt, native revolts against Greek rule had begun
about 230 B. C. , and it was a somewhat deSpairing Ptolemy who had
sought the help of Rome against threats from Macedonia and Syria.
When Antiochus IV invaded Egypt during the third Macedonia war, an
ambassador of the Roman Senate peremptorily ordered him to go home

again.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

l - - ‘ .
_-. a --' -".‘oo '0
'w' ' D. ‘1‘ o e
I ‘ ‘. 5.:
“.nc"
- 1-
'. -_. -¢- ‘- O
'.".’ G .4 ..'l
..-~~v.

. , - .‘
.v'rlo"".-.‘~.. . .
'.'fl ‘- --.I-I

-..-..--...-o.-
. .
‘ - .-
.-.. .""3. .TN .
-h‘ I‘."‘. soon :1 0-
. , .
..... .,’-’o ._ -9 2.. ’ o‘ I
- .
»»-—- ...a....a -g u.. ...~.
0‘ . ,
-' o . -,
. '-,. - ‘t'...
““'I‘u~ ‘-.V.. M
c
. . . .
“‘ C. . .. ..,. _.
' .- I . . .
'--J“...'--, 'u..
h I ' l -
- ,Iu' ..._ _.
.._..-.. 4v ...,., a. .u. .- g
I
..
. . I
.-_.p_"'o. o‘.‘ ~ p. I
.-----.-s... us.» ‘. , y .
~ I
‘
. a
I‘.. I“ . . .
.4 .“s ._..‘I IIhI..I
, n
l ‘a- ’
a. 1.. u",.-O.. I; .
'-.r‘. a
. any}. M. US' .
' .
0". -
h- _
., ‘.
. u... ‘~': . I
-g 0
f .;;~.,,_. . . .
..‘.. h":=ut- .- '.' ..
-. ‘II CLO...‘ It.
i"
: .;."" ‘0 .
m..._‘.;I . .0... ’I I.
'hM“: ..
- so. .
Q.
.
u
b
“-1... .I
423 : .
.~ - \
“‘o 4 I
.5
I .-‘I.,:.c . b
“’ 5-. f
-.(I
.
‘-
't
01... . .
0‘. .L

 

 

10

At first the Senate refused to annex defeated territories such as
Macedonia, Greece, and Syria, because the burden of direct govern-
ment of these areas seemed too heavy to assume. By the middle of the
century, however, the policy had changed, and the ensuing annexation
led to the creation of an extended empire which made of the Mediterranean
a Roman lake.

Thus by the mysterious outcome of the centuries, the simple
residents of a backward Latin city had been thrust into the unsought yet
reSponsible position of leadership of the world.

Underneath the glory in which Rome now basked because of her
conquests lay the manifestations of rather inglorious conditions in Italy
itself. ProsPerity, as always, brought its problems. The Republic was
flooded with the profits of war. A new aristocracy of wealth arose, and
this class invested in land and slaves. As for the freeborn farmer of a
lower financial status, he found that he could no longer compete with the
large landowners who worked their estates by slave-labor. Thousands of
these smaller farmers forsook the country for the cities, particularly
for the city of Rome. Here they became constituents ' of the Roman
mob, eager to listen to the promises of any revolutionary. Old-time
aristocratic patriots like Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus attempted to bring
about the needed reforms, but neither was permitted to live very long.
Professional soldiers named Marius and Sulla next vied with one another
for leadership. Each of these men claimed a large following, with the
former representing the disinherited freemen, and the latter advocating
the views of the landowners. Sulla increased his glory by defeating
Mithradates, king of Pontus, who had sought to rally the natives of the
East against Roman engulfment. During Sulla's absence, Marius had
marched on Rome, assassinated enemy Senators, and had himself

elected as Consul. Within a matter of days, however, Marius was dead.

. .
-. .
:v'rrz'x ” "'L"
A.'-.--.o.so .- ‘0. a.
.
o - n . , .,
-- '. " -.;|’~.- 0-. 9-.“
-'I--o. .C-o-d ‘_. ....
' .
a — __ .
PC .
-'- “ ‘05 g .

 

 

A ,..~

.., ..
a UN. . _

- ' I p-

.......-.._’. J.t

o......__._

 

 

. , .
... ”V .5. .. .“ .-
u.._.. ._,. .__0. ..‘
"n. "l. I
. n.0-..I.. n'. a ..
~QDO ~~... ’ ,,' \
..“. ‘4‘
' a. a
CI
.
._. '
h. , ._'.
' >- ‘ .
.‘I. ‘..~‘ .r.‘ . .-
a “"‘o.._ __
' I
' :0... n ‘
0-,...
. Q
u
\u-~ .
o
0-. ‘ 0.. '
v.1-“ .,
. 4! t“‘ .‘.‘.v4 ..‘
‘0»...
6
‘ O
‘ Q
g~‘
"a. I ’~., .
ugu.‘ I- ., .‘_ .
-..

00“..~;. ‘

 

 

 

11

Upon Sulla's return there was another period of extermination which
nearly truncated the career of Julius Caesar. The ensuing dictator-
ship of Sulla lasted for three years, and in 79 B. C. he resigned.
Shortly afterwards he died in retirement at Naples.

There was nothing permanent about the constitution for which Sulla
had been responsible, and the years which followed witnessed a succes-
sion of remarkable individualists who sought by all available means to
take over the helm of the Republic. "Most of these new leaders had
been under thirty when Sulla died; they began to fill important offices
about 70; and they remained in power until the death of Caesar a quarter
of a century later. "1

In Spain, the Marian leader Sertorius had provoked a revolt in
80 B. C. with much initial success. After the death of Sulla, Pompey
by command of the Senate, replaced the Roman generals who had proved
unsuccessful against the rebels. By 71 B. C. the revolt had been quelled
and Spain pacified. En route to Rome the victorious Pompey gave the
last stroke in the liquidation of the slave army led by Spartacus, a
project successfully prosecuted up to that time by the wealthy Crassus.
These two Roman generals now campaigned for the consulship, and both
were elected in 70 B. C. as a result of the persuasive effects of the
presence of their trooPs. In private life each consul feared and detested
the other.

In the same year, the equestrian scholar and orator Cicero con-
ducted a masterly prosecution of the Sicilian extortioner Verres. By
successfully defending soon afterwards the governor of Transalpine
Gaul against similar charges, his reputation was established, and his

rapid advance in politics apparently guaranteed.

 

lJoseph Swain and William Armstrong, The Peoples of the Ancient
World (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1959), pp. 384,- 385.

 

 

 

 

‘,_ . o -.
....~ \vn- "‘
. o ‘
’ .> s. ' -
-.'....- - " h
f. .. scat U1. ’
,. -... . 0... 31:7. v: -' .
.x. t C Q . -‘. - ‘
. ’

H“"."".'o-\ ‘

,I...... 5...... - -

 

‘
s ‘ ' -..- 0’6 w- o '
‘--v-. .. 9—0.- 5.. .-4 ‘

 

"‘_-.| “ .,.".'. I
' ' «‘- I50 4.. h

" .

.,,__.~. : "‘O I -

 

-.... . ,2“ A--.
. _. on ..
' ”“‘ J~~ ....'J r- '
\-
I 'Q- v
wi‘ .' . “v
*0. V .~
‘~~ nJA,...‘_. s .
H n
- .
.
.H
._.. .. ,
‘ 0..
-
0‘. v._.
0‘0.
.
“ 3. .~. h. .O- .
"‘ 500': ~ ' *-
-..
_..

‘ o. n- . .
. i". Oaé‘le r). 9"
- ~.u

 

 

 

12

After the joint consulship of Crassus and Pompey was over, the
former returned to the business of augmenting his wealth, and the
latter, within two years, was placed in command of the armies fighting
the energetic Mithradates in Asia Minor. Pompey successfully drove
the rebel back into the mountains, where he committed suicide.

Meanwhile, back in Rome, Crassus and others had their fears
that Pompey would return to Rome as a new Sulla. Fearful of proscrip-
tion should this occur, Crassus entered into an alliance with Julius
Caesar, who had become well-known in Rome both through his oratorical
powers and his former position as quaestor. In 65 B.C. Crassus and
Caesar were accused of being implicated in the unsuccessful plot of
Catiline to murder the consuls and seize government, but the entire
affair seems to have been carefully hushed up without too much loss to
either Crassus or Caesar. A noteworthy result of the plot, however, was
the further prestige it gave to Cicero, who had boldly exPos ed Catiline.

Pompey returned in 62 B. C. and to the relief of the Senate, he
disbanded his army. But two years later, enraged with the apparent
ingratitude of the government, Pompey joined with Caesar and Crassus
to form the first Triumvirate. Soon afterwards Crassus lost his life in
warfare against the Parthians. As for Caesar, he decided to increase
his influence and fame by the conquest of Gaul. When he later heard that
Pompey had been appointed as Dictator for life, Caesar made the momentous
decision to cross the Rubicon, despite the command of the Senate. The
Roman people hailed him as a hero and savior, and by 47 B. C. Pompey
was dead, and the remaining member of the Triumvirate absolute
monarch except in name.

Julius Caesar proved more than a great soldier. He was a far-
sighted and able statesman. He extended citizenship to aliens in distant

places, planted colonies, and restored Corinth and Carthage. He made

 

...In; "" 2.. ' ~
u... ~v““‘“'.'..
0c '
y
..- .v-o u r
..t-o ' ’
“..."... .‘:~..uo 00‘ u".
1
- . ~';:w""
-.-‘| ...,....-oao
‘..::’- if...‘ 0"
-,...,--ol- 5..-
. 0 '
:::“;-'&'A*“* ‘ '
o......~o 0.45.. - '
U. ‘
-.--o . ‘- a O ' ‘I
., Hp
‘..-\| ...- »;3. as ...
.
.. . . “n‘ .
l ‘1 :0‘0P~ 4 0.
u~ .- O unu§--..4u.- H‘J
" r
anrtz~ 9-» . '
......s....| |\J0 .9... v‘
.
n. o- '
u~ .. .- .,
r 'V" I. '~
-'.. 5.- ...C lto". s ’5
s
‘co 0..
a 'tlfi-k... .'. .
...... .....J...t ... c ,

~a "_

‘-
" ‘unu.

‘.-.. ' '
‘ ‘ A. .. n
’3"' an out ”I.

can ..

0-0. "
“t :tf?

I
s

 

 

13

plans for the codification of Roman law and for the reorganizing of the
provincial system. He believed that the latter should not be a mere
military despotism.

Strabo says that Caesar was always a lover of Alexander,
a sentence which does one good to keep in memory, linking the
great. He has, as Mr. Heitland says, a large imperial mind;
he is a statesman above all men in antiquity. No man is more
essentially Roman, but he has shared Greek culture, and he has
lived in the larger world; and, like Alexander, he wished to keep
and to combine in a larger union everything that has been proved
of value. He seems to have thought of a world reorganized on the
basis. of the monarchy that the Hellenistic kingdoms had been
developing. The central idea is a government answering to the
real facts. A sentence in Suetonius' life of him tells us how
Caesar reformed the Roman calendar, which was ninety days
wrong. "He fitted the year to the course of the sun," says
Suetonius. The sun, after all, is the final authority for any
calendar; and the calendar of Julius was used for centuries, and
was only superseded in Russia about 1917. In a very similar way
Caesar fits the government ofrthe world to the great essential
facts of the world. He is a realist, says Mommsen, and he
develops what is essentially a monarchical system--monarchical,
though not royal--where, at the head of all, there is one brain,
and a great brain, where all others responsible for the adrninis-
tration have to answer to the man, in whose hands are gathered
all the threads of government. Everything points to the greatness
of this man. 1

Caesar had named as his heir the eighteen year old Octavian.
Nevertheless, Mark Antony attempted to seize power after the fateful
event on the Ides of March 44 B. C. To counter this intended coup,
Octavian had the Senate appoint himself as general, and thereafter he
brought his army into Rome to procure for him the further office of
consul. His next step was to form a triurnvirate with Antony and Lepidus,
his rivals, in order to crush the republican forces under Brutus and

Cassius. The year 42 B. C. witnessed the ensuing battle of Philippi,

 

lGlover, pp. 147- 148 .

 

 

 

. . n_ “ .,
.... n‘s‘ ,. o
....r— , ' a ‘
‘ '4: .. .u-‘b V"‘
o
.A .. . .. o
-.- ... O- .. l. ‘ .
‘ . . ' .
-..; 3.“... '--.o!.u-,
- o
. . -
...-......z...‘ I"
4
3.......:.n-.-. .....
o
‘ I
n‘...-o.- t... -‘. v‘. ‘
...
~-......-.......u...l ~Il ..
a
v . . . h
tn v.. n I
'-',,0a;0u-~ 3.'_-
“- 1.... n...‘ .9... ~ . ~—
.
~,¢<.;. 2...... ......vg'. ., ..
“*"C I'd-~..L.o.>4o..\ ..
.. _
u . -.
..... .__ . .. . .
.. _ . F'. 0': r6'
'“"‘-'¢ .... ...-..os .
s.._, . J. ‘.
~o- ....O- .. .
d"."" to‘...l
9'-~.. .
‘: I“ 0......- ‘r ‘ -
nus-c .g“. .“ K ...
‘v-
‘--.
.
o~-. . _
P "I
m...,‘_.‘ ‘r m a... .’
- H“ "‘~ 5.
: ...
“u n.... ~'
."‘ ‘.. " 4. .r' .
5.5 , N v
‘ .“'"‘-~ A'. ...
‘1 s
. .. ‘
“a.“l pa. 5 w
. ‘5. - .
VA-J.{'IԤ
' ' -/s .
r. -
\"
_ a I;._
'-.. i 'I-._
cu..“‘c‘ .-.. _- .
s- ' 0
at. .

 

 

T- -
‘J P. h .
s 5“: y '
'0‘ u‘tt’: .r. ‘r
“,1 . ...
'\‘ ‘0.-
.. ‘
Q. a 3'5"“ ,.
c ‘ -
\
a a.
s.
., A
‘\Z' .... v
9-'
“st‘ l‘.‘. ‘ ‘
" Jl.r~ -
;;: 4‘ ar‘. “
' -~- ‘ ,4.
‘~J. in ~
1.1. 3" ... .
q ‘J‘.;Ch 1‘ .
‘A

 

l4

and the successful triumvirs divided the world among themselves.
Antony was to have Gaul and the eastern provinces. To Lepidus went
Africa, and to Octavius, Italy and Spain.

Soon afterwards Lepidus gave Africa to Octavius, and after the
latter defeated Antony at Actium in 31 B. C. he stood without a rival
in the place that had been Caesar's. The Empire which he inherited
stretched approximately from the Atlantic to the Euphrates, and from
the Danube and the Rhine to the Nile. The pOpulation of this area was
somewhere between eighty and one hundred and twenty million pe0p1e.
For the first time in centuries, this region was now to enjoy comparative
peace.

Emerging from the tensions and losses of a terrible internal
crisis, the unprepared Roman conquerors now urgently required a
solution to the problems of universal government. Did they have the
personal resources to meet such a challenge? What was the nature of
the typical Roman who by circumstances had been thrust into the position
of representative of the leadership of a world empire?

He was a new type in the world. Alexander and his Successors
had represented a type differing from the old Greek standards.
This was a third kind of man, a variety unfamiliar, and not too
welcome. It is the legal mind in the soldier, the administrator,
the supreme administrator who conquers and who keeps what he

conquers.1

To the Greek who really took the trouble to study him, the
Roman was a very curious and interesting character.Z

The Greek would adorn his city with statues and edifices of beauty;
the Roman provided his city with a system ~of sewers.3

 

'Ibid., pp. 89-90.
ZIbid., pp. 92-93.
31bid., p. 94.

. ,.
-.-,“ fl .
. I. . d .1.
,.: 3"... .
. Q
- O
' -‘ 0r;9 9,. .
-_ .. ‘ -.
.:‘;¢ow:fico Dali-V
y...‘

I ‘ '-
'IO I... . .
....
..t: .;-- .5 .. _ ,
. fl _

 

   

... .. ...;
-. a." o. “b.
.9..-

. ’ .-

. ‘_ . ‘
n.‘IRI‘ ’5. to ~ ‘~ ‘ 'l
"I ...--....." ‘

. l
. . V .
nIIl< .93. v'-" ’t
.. .... ...... is... ... ...
' a
.” I W
,_
"IV‘9'J.
‘ n
.. I-;9.b;.~ .. h
- .-~....,‘_ ~. .-
'
-. ‘._ .. .
F p“..-~; ‘ ’.
.us...4.n.c~ k... ..
..
-' “v-b...
. .-. ‘00‘ ..AJ.‘. ..‘
.-...-..' . .- .
. . .._. -
.- ..t. ‘ 0.... h , ‘
vs. s“... .-‘ -..

 

 

15

It is a ain a pe0p1e, as Plutarch notes, meticulously
careful in al that refers to ritual or the divine, in strange con-

trast to the slovenly ways of the Greek in handling his city's
religion. 1

These last few lines are significant. They help to answer the
question--What was the underlying concept which motivated Roman
emperors and peoples to successful government? The answer must

also throw light upon the life and thought of Roman society in the first

century A. D.
Rome's Inheritance of the Classical Tradition

The resources which finally enabled Rome to stabilize her Empire
were Spiritual and moral much more than they were material. It was
the conviction that fate had destined them to propagate classical civili-
zation which gave impelling power to both Princeps and pe0p1e. Through
the influence of religious concepts and a borrowed Greek culture, these
ideals were primarily manifested; and ultimately they were Spread
abroad by the poets of Rome as guiding stars for the new missionaries
of Classicism.

The historical fact that there was considerable religious skepticism
among the upper classes of Rome has often led to the diSparagement
of the significance of Roman religion in the Augustan age. Some well
documented and carefully prepared studies in recent years have indi-
cated, however, that it was resPect for Roman religion which energized
the implementation of classical ideals in the Empire. The evidence
indicates that at the beginning of the Christian era the Romans recast
their way of life to accomplish the final shaping of classical civilization.
Furthermore, they were apparently motivated to do this by the religious

conviction that it was their divinely appointed destiny to rule mankind

 

lIbid. , p. 95.

.. - . II-
0" ...
. v ‘ J.—kcv
”cu-4‘0 mu
.
, . IN _. . 0.
~ ' uP
"‘ '5' ~':_“.‘.. s...
,..-..~~| U
' . - a. "
l........ ; 9.: H‘
. u -
__. ‘.....o.nug
. I
.- n: ;--- ..c
-h-~~ Iso-IJO‘O -.
-
. o -p ... . .- -
“c o
.. but. ‘. I5 I- O
a
. , ...
- ‘ o.- .1 ... f, -. _
O-Iv tut 0‘ Atut. ‘O 0|
”v 20.; an:- “D .0 ‘
... ..-. .... -..h-h ..
.
2 ~ up ”...-In, .0
cu...“ -..-n A... -.....s.
. . _
t’.~. ... . _
- > ov" t '0- L-u -.
Ulr- ...“ ... ngsx .
-' .
.. .. . . _
Ia " "4 *A. .
' e ‘ Iunsd |.o-.\ .k
.
. g .-
.. tp";,,..’ M ..
.
‘h-so-“osgo on»... g‘ .
. l
""5 - .
on. I- 0~ 0
“-.‘

 

 

16

with justice and peace, in order that all men might be free to pursue
the good life. Because this view is contrary to that expressed by some
older historians, we draw heavily by way of citation from some modern
influential scholars.

To take one point before others, so much is plain, that
cult, the kernel of Roman religion, has a far wider importance
for state and politics than has generally been supposed. The
careful and unremitting worship of the gods will in that case
have been the necessary condition for the rise and rule of Rome.
. . . The idea that it is the gods who fix the destiny of Rome
and therewith hold it in their hands appears everywhere in unmis-
takable form.1

The question is always being raised whether it is proper to
speak of a religion of the age of Augustus, at least of one that
deserves the name in the strict and pr0per sense and that derives
its powers from something more than political motives. As in
the forms of the state, so too in the reorganization of religion
and cult, scholars have thought that they could recognize a mere
creation of the Emperor himself. Dictated by the will of the
Emperor not merely to restore the state, but to build it up in
such a way that the person of the 'Princeps' should be the real
centre of support for its structure, that order seemed to have
taken shape entirely under the influence of expediency and calcu-
lation. Of a true and deep relation to religion, in the Emperor
at least, there need, it was thought, be no question.

It might appear as a confirmation of this view that the age
itself seemed incapable of an original religious movement. The
last years of the Republic had set the seal on the recoil from the
gods of tradition. The philosoPhy of Epicurus, which banished
them to a blissful middle kingdom, not to be reached by any human
appeal, could at the beginning of this age count the best Romans
among its adherents. Hence it seemed impossible to credit the
following age with a belief of the old kind. Whatever was offered
in the way of outward glories, whether solemn ceremonies of
cult, grand new buildings or restoration of the old, could only be
designed to work externally on the great masses of the pe0p1e.
For the others, the philosoPhic Speculations about the nature and
activities of the gods--above all, the theology of the Stoa--

 

1Franz Altheirn, A History of Roman Religion, trans. Harold
Mattingly (London: Methuen and Co., Ltd., 1938), p. 423.

 

n¢vu"-"

...-...

'
.sosod-‘C O

 

Db

- . .
... ~.-.. 2-.. ‘0‘ .'
u. ..--.. b...‘ no.

.

;‘—;0wu-o'.v‘0 ....
na--.h~...‘ andb ...
- .
I D
. ‘ U- u
». ow, ‘ ‘p 0’” .- .
"‘ *"v uhoa on. -
. a
';v; -~'-‘. .... . '
—-¢. -l~__..“... . ..
b
-

..-...’,, ...

‘ a
~p......' 4.. (.0
A

7' .

 

.
”';':."— mo Op-

. '-
.. 4
t:-‘O‘..vtl a. ..‘\ .
-

..~ '9‘ -~. .
h... ' b o ‘.- ‘ “

""“ ~.b-..‘ , . ...
'G

“'o -,-‘ ~
‘m! .‘9' 5" ~
..-4 -.‘._ “ . ‘

.-..- .

_‘~ , ...! '
I u..
\VL... ~.‘_““ v-o ‘, .... -
‘ ~~...‘.i . ~ .
a

'I. .
'o

1,-- ‘- ;.~".” '0‘
...-......9:‘ . p' \-

 

 

 

17

supplied a practical means of diSposing of the inherited con-
ceptions.

Such is the view that still finds supporters to-day, that
may even, if we disregard a few exceptions, rank as orthodox. 1

But,

the epoch and its religion are not something that simply occurred,
something that ripened to full growth; their appearance is linked
in time with the appearance of the ruler; the new element is
there overnight. First, we find a heyday of the teachings of
Epicurus, an elegant scepticism or, at best, a philosoPhic in-
terpretation of the popular belief--and, a few years later, a
complete change of heart--what had before been scorned not
only taken seriously, but almost recognized as the meaning of
human existence.2
Altheim significantly refers to Horace and Virgil as "those two great
men who determined the Spiritual state of the Rome of their day. "3

Everything that we have learned to describe as the meaning of
the system of Augustus, the 'will to order, clarity, moderation,
health, conservatism, consistency'--all that is to be found in
the poets before ever it was manifested in the renewal of the
state by Augustus.4

Glover's statement regarding the Aeneid supports this:

. . . out of it come three things: the worth once more of that
.Italian race, the value of human character as seen in Aeneas,
and of the ImPerium that God has given to the Roman people.5

Cochrane also agrees with this viewpoint when he points out that
the classical idealism of Greece, popularized by Romans such as Cicero
prior to the days of Augustus, received its dynamic in the poetry of

Virgil.

 

131113;, pp. 369, 370.
z_1_13_ig_._, p. 371.
33333:, p. 377.
433119;, p. 384.
5Glover, p. 113.

Iv-‘- 'vv‘
.. 40....

“'4 F D-un.‘ .p...
§
_; "' “t 'UJJI.~—o ..
. _.
l_ . ,__ . ‘0 .
‘ . Q d .o ,-
nt‘.4-uu-g .“..
. h
o- , .
I . .. ' '_ ‘
s. . .
tn... flu.) ...‘t b.\
";”.\-u-....-._’_ [N-
~~ r‘ a I .
a... 4"... “.... y .

 

I - I
>.~‘I~ "_‘. ... .
'46... g n
‘ "“ on; ._.
'.;:..;‘. I - av.
.-..»yW .“t ' 90* J. .h
.
.
IA
- ~c’
-... n;~ ".6. ‘"_ .
8 Dub l“. l‘ I.
' A
-.'!.I .
~T v -.. .
-‘~ “ - i" 0.. u
- ““ c¢.“
- .‘h‘

 

 

18

It is a truism to say that ideas have no legs; by themselves
they do not march. Something, therefore, in the nature of a
dynamic was needed in order to impart to Ciceronianism the
vitality which it lacked; something to win it acceptance and make
it what it was destined to become--the common coin of posterity.
This dynamic it was the function of Vergil to provide. In provid-
ing it, he supplied the final ingredient to the ideology of the
Augustan age. 1

Those who like Cicero believed in the classical virtues saw in the
failure of Pompey and Caesar the result of character defects. Cicero
believed in the existence of a definite distinction between right and wrong.
He opposed with all his might the doctrine of Lucretius. This is important
if we accept the view of scholars such as Cochrane, who asserts that
Cicero ”was the medium for the propagation of those ideas which in-
formed the law and institutionsof the empire. "2

There is a moral influence in great literature, whatever its
theme; and it is indeed to be felt as you read Cicero. He is always
the advocate of a higher life, a moral and reflective life, conscious-
ly and deliberately the advocate of it, and unconsciously, for his
belief in the best informs all he does. With all his weaknesses,
says Mr. Heitland, there hangs about him ”a certain atInOSPhere
of truth, of goodness andof nobility. " He was the most highly
cultivated man of antiquity, says Mr. Warde Fowler. He loved
all that was beautiful--a beautiful house, works of art, poetry.
He dreamed that he could write. verse, and Juvenal laughed at him
for it, but Virgil read Cicero's verse and learned something. If he
was no poet, he certainly could write prose.

In his personal ideals and endeavours, far more than in his
successes, Cicero sets conscience on the throne of life. He was
the Latin world's teacher in philosophy.3

"It was through Cicero that Greek thought reached the world. "4 Cicero

also believed that:

 

1Charles Norris Cochrane, Christianity and Classical Culture:
A Study of Thought and Action from Augustus to Augustine (New York:
Oxford University Press, 1957), p. 61.

21bid., p. 39.
3Glover, pp. 109-110.
41pm., p. 111.

 

 

 

, - .
.C. L

 

. .

....-co.-.. .*'~
.

—~CA‘>‘|O.¢C co. .0

 

 

; we. "v-P :-~v-.,O.'
....g.... a..- . .... ~
. .
a»... o- -m‘ ..V. .. '
,r s 03.5 ..
a .ru ..J\I§Io‘. .c
-o-
...
'. R A:-
.. .
t In. "“--‘ .*p.
""V- -n.¢.-oo ....
., ,
'.~~..-.. .. _. to
... ,_ " p...
..¢..~ r. ..“. ...
-o. u .
u."‘ n‘. . .
'-l.... _" A ., .
pr iIIIQ“ J‘ J . ‘

 

I’u .. I
'. ' . i
s. __ ...: «- ...;a ‘. a _.
‘.”" 4‘ J 4
.r .
. .
,I
‘9
'. ~-. _
.I I I ‘.-‘F .
l v -aa‘....:“.. ‘F... -
I“
u n
- o. _. . '
u 'd n \ “' . .
‘
I J 0‘... .r ~Vfi" -
1‘. "" v
I ."-
x‘v .. \ t A .
“‘¢ . ‘ .
‘V C '1'
f" '
. o- ‘_ .
. . .
1'04 Jt : ...-‘H . _
"v‘.,,‘ . ‘
o . "‘ a
.-
‘ n ‘
J‘ ~."‘-.0. ‘

x, ._ .
..‘J5-4.
. lo

 

 

19

. . . sentiments like loyalty and justice (pietas et justitia),
upon which the life of organized society depends, had their
ultimate basis in religion and that they could survive only if
this fact were recognized. Accordingly, he rejected the facile
identification which scientific materialism had made between
religion and superstition, and maintained that the true alterna-
tive to superstition was a form of high religion, i. e. of religion
purified and illuminated by the knowledge of nature. 1

 

It is De Officiis which best expresses this philosopher's concept

 

of the purpose of life. He declares that men exist in order to attain the
complete potential of being by the faithful discharge of obligations to
themselves and to others. The moral ideal of Plato is elevated as a
guide. Particular stress is given to the duties of magistrates. He sum-
marizes the duties of public office as follows:

(1) to maintain the rights of property;

(2) to abstain from burdensome taxation;

(3) to ensure to every one an abundance of the necessities of life;

(4) to be scrupulously clean-handed, above the suSpicion of greed
or corruption. 2

We have already referred to the estimates placed upon the
De Officiis by great modern authorities. In this essay the author
gives final utterance to his conviction that the end for which nature
has designed mankind is the achievement of what may be called
empirical selfhood, and that the purpose of organized society is to
promote its deveIOpment by establishing and maintaining adequate
social controls. In so doing, Cicero proclaims an ideal of
excellence not unworthy of human beings. At the same time, he
insists upon their capacity to realize that ideal through a self-
imposed discipline in which the passions are subjected to the con-
trol of reason; and in this he sees a possibility of transcending the
limitations of barbarism and of 'civilizing', without supressing,
the ego.3

 

Such concepts as this led to the Roman ideal that its First Citizen

should be a kind of "superman”--a philosopher and ruler combined as

 

1Cochrane, p. 41.
211014., p. 54.
31bid., pp. 56-57.

.-
.-... ... y -n 3 ’4. .
...:u.‘ ..;--| g. nu...
-; 2; "-2' 2" V r
J'... u. ‘..o- ads-a. a -

.
. . o

..---a..- .. ..,I h

' . I - .

l‘~"'.. IJ""~:“II J4

. . .
I ' ‘ . v-O‘vvs ..O
4...- .- .t‘.l.o..\.-O. I

;~...

. . '

.-.
u. '- 0 .
*“J-o‘.‘ ’ fi . ‘.

“- betJ. .‘ ,-

 

 

 

20

pictured by Plato. He must of necessity be a man of supreme virtue
as well as great ability in order that the gods might work through him.
Augustus looked back to Cicero for the justification of his power.
The writings of Horace and Virgil gave their support to the picture of
the Princeps as a worthy constituent and representative of the gods.

It need hardly be stressed that both Virgil and Horace
voiced a sentiment and attitude that is absolutely in harmony
with the order of Augustus. It has, however, recently been
emphasized that it was not merely the presence of that order
that moved the poets to preach the things that bound them in
their hearts to the work of the princeps. It is now suggested
that at a time when the new elements were scarcely beginning
to show themselves, not to Speak of reaching their final form,
they found their expression in the word of the poets. 1

 

Grenier also has seen the relationship between the poets and the
new age.

. . . Poetry, above all, lent its lustre to the new patriotism and
ensured its diffusion. The Muse defined Octavian's policy and
placed herself at his service. Horace and Virgil were the heralds
of this national reaction. 7‘

Cruelly though these hopes have been disappointed, this idea of

the Roman Peace extending its blessings over the world is truly

a great and noble conception. It was only an aspiration, no doubt,
only an ideal, but it is all to the honour of the Roman people that
they ever conceived it. It roused genuine enthusiasm in a whole
generation, chiefly among humble, simple people, all those who
were most helpleSs in the presence of public calamities and had

the most to hope'from a social rebirth. Virgil, the poet of shep-
herds and the son of peasants, gives this ideal a religious and
miraculous colour. Earth, of herself, without labour, will offer
her gifts to man; all ills, all perils will fade away; the lion will

no more be the terror of the flocks; the serpent will die, the
poisonous plants will die; there will be flowers and fruit everywhere.
When Horace, in his skilfully chiselled lines, expresses the popular

 

lAltheim, pp. 383-384.

zAlbert Grenier, The Roman Spirit in Religion, Thought, and Art
(London: K. Paul, French, Trubner and Co., Ltd., 1926), p. 293.

. ... ; O~ 0“
nv;o—-‘ at 0...:- OJ ..

{'E’ 07'. 0'" 6-"'-
u ‘A..‘.‘ .‘

 

..... 0.; h;'--.'.- b" o
c .
...... J-u...-.. -

 

.. -..a... .',.
1. 6
' - ' r-.\

C
.. ..¢;o- 4‘

 

' 1 .
'Dv'--- .- - A~-’ '
'

~I-O.— sub J‘.:S W;
‘V ~~ | -.
on \ ‘

.
:'“;' '. 9h u .

 

I ' u "‘ ~O u
-- .""'“tl a. D‘ .

u... _‘ ,

;..:‘ ~' 9 ""I- I.

. “as...

 

1 .
...
... .-I-‘ " I.» I
‘5
......g ~u “N‘- -..vl
-

 

‘.
l‘.u-..‘ ‘ ' v
\'_:'~" 0 h ” '-
’° 4», ’ '. .'
0..., J I
‘ ~»-.
.’V;-‘-‘- .
0.." I w. ...- .
. v I\d...c' be... h N. _
\ ..,g. u
I \
.;.';"-.
. -. .
"...: ...," -
J._.‘..: “ .._
‘ c... .. r .
‘.'I/ I.
.“_
.: .--. ,
‘ ‘
“ ~34): ‘ an“, . ,
I ‘I . '
“....
I Q
4.

~ .. A
"'1c:. “.

 

 

21

feeling, he tries to make it clear in more realistic pictures.
He finds the elements of them in the sights of country life

and in the beautified memories of the past of Rome. The peace
of Augustus is the ox cutting his furrow, the god Faunus going
through the byres and folds and heaping his blessings on the
beasts and their young, or the ploughman happily enjoying his
supper in the midst of his family. It is also the revival of the
glorious days of Romulus, Regulus, Fabius, Cato, the days
when everyone, it was thought, had been wise and good, and the
gods, content with the piety of the pe0p1e, had given Rome
unmingled glory. 1

According to the Aeneid, it is destiny which ordains all things.
From eternity it had been decided that the dominion of the world should
be given to Rome, the heiress of Troy. Throughout the story the hero
Aeneas is pictured as one who abandons himself wholly to the gods who
direct and protect him. "The whole epic is dominated by a majestic
finality, as flattering to Roman pride as it was consoling to the conquered. "2

With right, the Aeneid became the great national work, not
only for Rome itself, but for the whole of the Graeco-Roman
artistic tradition was gathered up in a new and living form, the
memories of the old Republic were united with the noblest
asPirations of the new Empire, the purest Latin patriotism was
allied with a generous phiIOSOphy of Mediterranean history,
Latium and Italy were extolled but reconciled with Africa while
the origins of their glory were linked with Asia, and the practices
of the old worship were associated with the mystical asPirations
of contemporary religious feelings. In details of workmanship,
the idealism and conventionalizing methods of great classical
poetry were enhanced by realistic touches and minute accuracy,
while the myth was studded with pictures of present-day life
and localized in a fundamentally true landscape. By its very
complexity, Virgil's epic answered to the most diverse tendencies
of the individuals and pe0ples pacified and brought together by the
Empire. It was truly the poem of Imperial Rome, the epic of the
world and the new age.3

 

‘Ibid., pp. 296-297.
zlbid., p. 309.
31bid., p. 314.

. a
pw-‘n'rQ.‘ :

' .
‘ .P v p
. Op '
n ' 5 C .‘du 00-
_-‘..nuu-‘ L..-

.o
' ‘ ‘ .-... o-
....no u... t

, p . .

l _ Q . '
... ...... .‘..o 'u -. p... .-
' «.2- .
...w -s 41.... w. o .
.

. . «n... ..
I'- A. ‘
.«g-.‘.;....contv i."- '4
.
--
u-uo. .
. r. ...c .L..,_.
.
... ... .0 .
I. p'p , ".
.... ...”..4- J. -
n- n _
C ‘ ‘
nun—... 4.. ~,. _‘_ ~

‘
I. a . ‘ .
Iv‘.I‘~ Q; i. .
"~un»n... ..._
c
\o ','_ ..

 

'9- -..'.. .’ ,
. . q ' r
‘ F
as c~5ofiQ *~.:“‘w'-.
n
'l
u- - ,
a " 9-“ ~i~o ._ __
n .I...... a. ‘ u
i “ .._‘
t
0
h"
5.-
H
I
h‘
2' . -
.9. A ‘. ... .
“5.. ..‘z k9 , '-
~ .
... I
«a... - .
v- I‘ .' V”... >' . .
h “0tc‘...‘
o
...._‘
cs.‘\.- _, o

 

no.
. ..~..‘- . ‘
I ‘ u I
"ha-Ha -- ..
. ‘ d " 5.
"I. V
'L" ‘>. ‘
‘- fl ‘- . ‘ ‘
~~ “‘-.‘.\‘ ‘. .D- ‘ .
C v. ‘-.k v
a
'N,
‘-'...~‘

 

 

22

Augustus, the true hero of the poets, was himself profoundly
religious. According to Suetonius, the Princeps carried fear of the
gods to the point of superstition. For defense against lightning Rome's
First Citizen wore an amulet of seal's skin. Omens and auspices were
seriously taken into account by him on all occasions.

That the religious tendencies of Augustus were profoundly
sincere cannot be doubted. That they were reinforced by a
political purpose also appears evident. Augustus saw in religion
one of the essential elements of Roman tradition, and he deliber-
ately modelled his attitude on that of the old Roman magistrates.
Like them, for example, he made a fundamental distinction between
the official worships consecrated by Roman usage and innovations.
He evinced profound re3pect for the former and disdained the
latter. In Athens he had been initiated into the Eleusinian
Mysteries, but in Egypt he had refused to look at the ox Apis,
and when his grandson travelled in Judea he congratulated him
on having refrained from offering prayer in the Temple of
Jerusalem. 1

Thus it is that we find in the will of Augustus the record that he
had caused eighty-two of the ancient temples to be repaired. He also
elevated the dignity of the priestly offices and announced that had he a
daughter he would have proudly made her a Vestal Virgin.

When the picture is fitted together, it seems evident that Augustus
manifested to the Empire the ideals and the sense of divine mission
which Cicero and thelpoets had eXpressed in writing. The Romans were
brought to view themselves as the inheritors of all that was good in the
past, in order that by virtue and diligence they might fulfil the will of
the gods in establishing a universal realm of peace and justice. The two
Hellenic types of human excellence, "that of the 'hero' and that of the
'citizen' were reconciled by Eternal Rome. ..2 Plato and Aristotle had

met together in the new Empire.

 

lIbid., p. 373.
zCochrane, p. 86.

.

o:
n *.'._..~..qp
.qu-

‘ .....a'an ' a.
'v'- ‘

 

I
l- .0- Op- H.’
'. i P on
P. n-
.....1410- Loot ‘
.

...- .'...’ -c‘ .
h.¢ ... ‘0 .‘."
3...... fiw§tl

‘ I - _-ls .
...... . ‘ __.
4-..: *uv‘b, 9 use

a -

... .z. .-_.,, ,- *9“
at... ....u .§.u.. no u...

' I.
-"““ gm; ’c p.

 

 

 

 

 

 

g n
. 'V .o

I... p..o...cau s I n- -
.

, . .

-v. ..__ . -~ .

4!. '. " . ' —h\

.. -..uu J. \50. ~n- ~-
.

tn- ~;- u'.‘ On 2".
.c.J.-..4 ‘1‘- ...} .... .

.

:.. 9...: -. -.., ... .. .

I... h‘., ‘- v. e ... .. .
. D -

. .. 0.... \I.;_.,_...-_

""~* an out .‘ovn.\~.. ‘
- ‘ Q
';:._-tu...c . ,.
"-~~a- up sous an“...
n. ..- ; .

‘ _ r ~-. - .
.....n. -C:..C .4 .V
"d a

‘ ‘vm- ..

L" a -~ .
x...” ..“...‘~ J. k . . .
...." o
..‘ - ...—‘- .. P'

a-.. I .

- 'd““c¥~ 9‘ \'.|.‘~

.

..- A. .

4:9?- "12-24...

... _,..“_.k ‘0 . ...
...

...~ “6"
‘ I" 9-- - ...

 

23

In summary it might be said that:

. . . despite the perils and uncertainties to which it gave rise,
the crisis which issued in the principate may be regarded as,

on the whole, a crisis of adjustment, during which men never
quite lost faith in the possibility of conserving the essential
elements of the classical heritage. This, indeed, was precisely
the aim of Augustus; his work marks a herculean effort to solve
the problems of his age in terms consistent with the thought and
aspiration of classical antiquity. From this standpoint, his
problem was to associate the notion of power with that of service
and thus, at one and the same time, to justify the ascendancy of
Rome in the Mediterranean and that of the Caesars in Rome.

To see it in this light is not merely to credit the founder with a
sincere desire to reconcile the new demands of empire with the
ancient claims of civic freedom; it is also to discover the
possibilities of Classicism as a basis for the good life in what
has been characteristically described as the happiest and most
prosPerous period in the history of the human race. 1

General Characteristics of the Empire

What was the external picture of Roman life in the first century?
We would briefly sketch its characteristics under the headings of a
positive set and a negative.

The first of the benevolent characteristics of the Empire was that

of peace. The Pax Romans. fulfilled mankind's ancient dream. The

 

faction-fighting which had marked many of the Hellenistic cities was
discontinued. As for the Mediterranean, it was a peaceful lake. The
Roman army was reduced to a minimum, for Augustus decided against
trying to extend the Empire by further wars.

Secondly, the triumph of Rome marked also the triumph of law
and justice. Undoubtedly there were some governors who presumed on

the basis of their powers, but these usually paid the ultimate price of

 

lIbid., p. 3.

 

. ..- 3
a 1.. . IO.-
--.¢ u- ‘
.
s- - pH 0

, - .... ’
“.1‘ .’ ' "’ -
--o. yum-A C“ i'
, .

.g a... .. .4
-v‘l. a a n '3‘
wt

__......Ju ...t A

 

A

-_....-.o-. bm.a.--\.
.

- .
“""--c .n -

.,... .
as.
-—-¢~.~- Jo ~g-u at: I...

 

. ' .
.z‘h ugn go. .5
”““"Co-. “at....

‘. in .. ‘
-. a“ .. ...-g -..
v ....u... 5‘
-. ... .
. 0“ .
“" ~v- . -;._ F"
3. --.;

I ..
.. ,
:- u- .‘h ...

;. -0~.QOP

 

mus... 4 ,.
' 6 o..- 5...,
u
.-
n. .
.. l I' .
“-.. I: t“. H‘“-
. .
Jr‘- _ v‘. '
. -., l.
- 3 ,
4, .. .
. 4" n-.

 

 

24

recall and disgrace. The world had never before known such wide-
spread equity in legal and financial matters. Similarly, a public
administration now existed which was uniquely efficient. This was
accomplished, admittedly, by the emphasis of Augustus upon the
stabilization of classes and their functions. The two citizen classes,
the knights and the proletariat, had their ambitions and services pre-
determined for them. However, the senatorial and equestrian orders
"were by no means closed castes; the way lay open to able and success-
ful men for advancement from the lower to the higher grades. "I

A corollary of the above was the new safety of life. Pirates and
brigands were put down, and there were a freedom and security in
travel that had been unknown before.

Ideas also were permitted comparatively free circulation.
Undoubtedly Rome tended more to the Greek rather than the Oriental
culture, but in the distant provinces of the east as elsewhere there
was freedom to pursue local customs and to believe in local cults.

As shall be noticed later, many of the Oriental religious ideas penetrated
even the West.

The extension of Hellenic culture was another gift of the Empire.
The famous line of Horace regarding the manner in which the conquered
Greek took his masters captive is a true description of what actually
occurred.

Finally, this list should include Rome's introduction of progress
to hitherto backward nations. Britain and Gaul were led out of barbarism,
the helots of Sparta were freed, and like transformations occurred
throughout all the distant provinces. Particularly important was Rome's

encouragement of city life, a feature later re3ponsible for the develOpment

 

1Arthur E. R. Boak, A History of Rome to 565 A.D. 4th ed.
(New York: The Macmillan Company, 1955), p. 267.

 

.... .5

. -
_.. ...-I. -n‘ I

, | - W
rnv.«; -v-'u--D- Q ' ,
.&.-.0. ...-Down“, “ow-0‘
O

.- .p
.. . . .
'. I.— - up: .O-r .
,4” .n Ahd... ... 5...
o" ‘ a .
n-.-.- . a Q o
- > - '0' Cw ’
.... ...L ..‘s -... a .

.. .
‘ n.._.

. -.
. a " n. - - 9
...... D‘u . .

"~o """Oo‘.=. .... ,
-- '-o. . ' ,
u‘ 1. ‘b...’ ”.1” *
“~0- ‘. ‘ , .
“ 'J- " §
_ '.
..
N .
..
~._.:. '- ..‘, Q 9‘
-v....‘. on I
. “.¢J.
.—

‘-
n... '- -..._
...... u ‘
t “a: i: I".
-.
'ot. «
*‘J:' I-.- .
~.._ '-
tx." ‘ ...‘_
¢p...
‘- Q
~ 0
....
- o-. .
‘I:"a. ‘0
‘»-: J. .b;ne ‘
‘a- 4"" O
" ‘—
-- .z'.
'-

 

II. ‘
..
- ~
"t; " A.
~ ‘ o.
' 2‘ *4: "

 

 

25

of influential missionary centers of the early Christian church.
Alexandria, Antioch, Ephesus, and Corinth ranked in importance with
the city of Rome itself.

The negative set of characteristics of the Empire was- in some
cases the almost inevitable accompaniment of imperialism. For
example, the captive races knew no self-determination. They were
subjects of the Roman Empire, and along with their inheritance of the
good came the realization that they were no longer free to shape their
own national destinies. International rivalries bring their advantages
as well as their drawbacks, but there was no scope for such competition
in the first century A. D.

While there was a new honesty in financial matters wherever it
could be enforced, there also existed some disastrous economic habits
in the areas of trade and taxation. As the years went by, oppression by
tax-collectors increased, robbing the vitality of provincial workers,
although in the first century taxation in most places was still compara-
tively light. The extent of trade in luxuries from the East reached the
amount of almost two million dollars a year. This much money went
to the Orient, but little gold and silver travelled in the other direction.

The institution of slavery did not, of course, originate with the
Roman Empire, but it is certain that the conquests which established
the new rule multiplied the numbers of human beings in bondage in Italy
particularly. This led to what Walbank calls "the complete stagnation
of technique. "1 Slaves naturally did not have any incentive to make
technological improvements. Furthermore, where labour was cheap it
was natural that freemen should come to look down upon such occupations

as could be discharged by menials. Worse still was the consequent

 

11“. W. Walbank, The Decline of the Roman Empire in the West
(London: Cobbett Press, 1946), p. 27.

 

«
-.. .. n-O" :

P .

O
.-.- ... a... I... 00“

(I)

.... .... ‘ .
' s‘ ,. *9“ "o '9
... ...... nobulh J.na»'

 

 
   

\u.’ - ‘
‘ ‘ ... I...- . -
h-d.-.| . a. 5...: o - --
‘ - v o. ...
_ t-
h. ....u-u‘ 4‘ ..‘t " ...
u
w - .
a" “-nu--

.. -
'Nv-../..l figs
.

 

 

26

deterioration of character which accompanies a slave-system. In the

section on morals this point will be elaborated.
PhilosoPhy in the Graeco-Roman World

It is what men believe that inevitably Shapes their institutions
and habits. For this reason we would attempt to picture the intel-
lectual climate of the Graeco-Roman world.

PhilosoPhy was the particular gift of Greece to the Western world.
With the inhabitants of the Aegean was born the conviction that human
reason, efficiently directed, could arrive at the determination of truth.
Such a concept stands in contrast to earlier Oriental concepts that truth
came by way of supernatural revelation or that truth came by partici-
pation in cosmic processes.

Cicero is our most reliable witness regarding the major philoso-
phies current in his age. Himself an eclectic, he had not only read
widely, but in his youth he travelled to Athens to receive the best Greece
had to offer. In his treatise on the gods he mentions the four Schools of
philosoPhy of significance in his day. They are enunciated as follows:

(1) The Epicureans, (2) the Stoics, (3) the Academics, (4) the Peripatetics.

The Peripatetics belonged to the School of Aristotle, but they had
augmented their store by some Stoic concepts. Ultimately the Peripatetics
were absorbed into Neo-Platonism. The Academics represented the
School of Plato, but they also had made some significant additions. In
Cicero's dialogue it is the skeptic Cotta who represents this group.
Because the Peripatetics and the Academics were the least influential of
these four Schools in the first century, we shall discuss the teachings of

their founders before considering Stoicism and Epicureanism.

1'}

 

F.- .
“.... . ~ .. _. .
so. 1 . I
an...» .. on ol—t .

-' I
‘- - - -.u
.- .... '. .‘ht.’ F
...-... “-.. ... . . ‘
no
"rah. ., ..
- . u. j". ._'
V “0.. .5 '-A
‘ O
w-o. .
.. a ' -""‘ 3 - ... ' ..
n o.--_.‘ ' ‘ ‘
.

 

 

 

4...... had .. .‘. ..
|.
- I
s
.. U.
. V
4’ . ,
cho.... ' .
I'... a. I"... l
I —
“ih'”. " ‘ to Q
on. . .
“V “ 45.. ~—
~ h. . .
u- ‘0 |._ .
~.. .- .- .- s...,
~ U
h. ““ 5.3....\.
~...,.
. {A
' \
- -
'--... u ‘.,";o..‘- a.
' "“;‘0.: I
' o...,
.-
D ‘-
u-,M . .“~v.“ _ ~ ‘
oacs...‘ ,4: 3 '. _
... ...” d. .
. .
.' . ~. . ,
.~.~. :.’-.._‘ ._ .
'5-
‘...£ ‘, ‘
.d
. ‘ 1a.. 0‘ I
~
.
.I
.hn-
.: i...
...‘M.

 

 

27

Plato

 

Of that unique man
Whose name is not to come from the lips of the wicked.
Theirs is not the right to praise him--
Him who first revealed clearly
By word and by deed
That he who is virtuous is happy.
Alas, not one of us can equal him.
Arist., Frag. 623 (Rose, 1870)1

Born at Athens 428-27 of a distinguished family, Plato was later
educated in the traditions of the Periclean regime. He became a devoted
disciple of Socrates. The latter might be called the founder of moral
science, inasmuch as before his time philos0phy had been largely
physical, seeking for an eXplanation of nature. Thus it was from Socrates
that Plato inherited many of the features which were to characterize his
own system.

Like Socrates, Plato refused to believe the View of the SoPhists

that truth is relative. In the Theaetetus he challenges the theory of

 

Protagoras that knowledge is perception, and that what appears to be
truth to an individual may be such for him only. Typical of his arguments
is that of Socrates in reply to the dictmn of Protagoras that "Man is the
measure of all things. "

He [Socrates] points out that the majority of mankind believe in
knowledge and ignorance, and believe that they themselves or
others can hold something to be true which in point of fact is not
true. Accordingly, anyone who holds Protagoras' doctrine to be
false is, according to Protagoras himself, holding the truth [i. e.
if the man who is the measure of all things is the individual man. ]2

Plato predicted that true knowledge is a knowledge of universals

not of sensible particulars. He believed that for every class of objects

 

1Frederick COpleston, A History of Philosophy (Westminster,
Maryland: The Newman Press, 1953) vol. 1, p. 261.

21bid., p. 145.

 

.

v n. » ..-... v“ "' '
‘.‘.. ~ 0‘ ‘ f‘ "
'“V .... .. --u- at. so.» 5

. o ‘ .

... ... |,.- .n-- .
Op § I 0‘
-... .s a. fig... 0d~fi

 

. o
.... -;-~;‘~0‘ {I :‘v-
- ...-... .4 an... .... . t

‘I‘ g ’ .
v‘r\4' . " .2." ' . -
.-.-u...‘ J. I‘d‘l- 0«A. .-

 

cl.-.. .

I ‘

‘ ' .... .* Q... . ’

' .‘

: -.. ....--‘u ...: 2" .

\.....

' n .0: “.

-..... .- ~‘ ..‘p .A .J ... I
. on». uV . I-‘u.
..

-o- ..
:; :“‘; u‘ .- .
' 'C b-..- . . .I‘
I ...-

 

 

28

there also existed in the metaphysical realm a perfect "form" or
"idea. " It is this ”idea" which is the true reality. The individual
discernible objects of any particular class are temporary. They are
mere shadows of the invisible perfect "idea. " Thus, true knowledge
is the result of rational appreciation of the Spiritual rather than what
is gained through the senses. The famous illustration of the cave
brings us closer to Plato‘s meaning.

Plato asks us to imagine an underground cave which has an
Opening towards the light. In this cave are living human beings,
with their legs and necks chained from childhood in such a way
that they face the inside wall of the cave and have never seen

the light of sun. Above and behind them, i. e. between the
prisoners and the mouth of the cave, is a fire, and between them
and the fire is a raised way and a low wall, like a screen. Along
that raised way there pass men carrying statues and figures of
animals and other objects, in such a manner that the objects they
carry appear over the top of the low wall or screen. The
prisoners, facing the inside wall of the cave, cannot see one
another nor the objects carried behind them, but they see the
shadows of themselves and of these objects thrown on to the wall
they are facing. They see only shadows.

These prisoners represent the majority of mankind, that
multitude of peOple who remain all their lives in a state of
eihasia, beholding only shadows of reality and hearing only
echoes of the truth. Their view of the world is most inadequate,
distorted by "their own passions and prejudices, and by the
passions and prejudices of other people as conveyed;to them by
language and rhetoric. " And though they are in no better case
than children, they cling to their distorted views with all the
tenacity of adults, and have no wish to escape from their prison-
house. Moreover, if they were suddenly freed and told to look
at the realities of which they had formerly seen the shadows,
they would be blinded by the glare of the light, and would imagine
that shadows were far more real than the realities.

However, if one of the prisoners who has escaped grows
accustomed to the light, he will after a time be able to look at
the concrete sensible objects, of which he had formerly seen
but the shadows. This man beholds his fellows in the light of
the fire (which represents the visible sun) and is in a state of
pistis having been "converted" from the shadow-world of eihones,

 

a
s
._
. .
‘- ‘ .‘-.O3 u o- 0
41-: no...-s.--.U » o
' O
' ' 0-1
......'a -‘ Q
~:' '0‘. ..u-.-C¢‘ ..
‘ Q
‘ l
'-- :--.-;o... l .
""'v-“~On‘. .' .
.
' o
‘o; -:..-. .p.. 0.... ;
b. ~O'u axon. ...- _

v . av- ’

u
. ,_1 -p — o
r- n "
~‘b.h0~' «.3- 5.. ~-
0 .' ‘ ' O. I
.. a . .
a“ ,4" cu ' .
...... no-4. cast. I, 0 1
u
... u . -.
‘p. a. . .- .O‘ . o .
'-U C“) u‘.‘ ... an. i
' u- ‘
b- n - . '
.‘~-. 0 "' " .
...h“'°. . va-cl, 0-.
-'°--c ..'
', - .- .
u»-..“‘_.' t . ....
a.-. '
I n . ' ‘_‘ v- . ‘.
.... ' n
A a. .. , _. . .
R‘
If 2“ V“. -
o o ‘v ... '.. ' ‘
.
‘I..- c .
i g. " ‘C-O k- .
"‘-\. ‘t‘ - 5 " °
u .. .. ..

 

 

 

 

29

prejudices and passions and SOphistries, to the real world of
_z§_a_._, though he has not yet ascended to the world of intellig-
ible, nonsensible realities. He sees the prisoners for what
they are, namely prisoners, prisoners in the bonds of passion
and s0phistry. Moreover, if he perseveres and comes out of
the cave into the sunlight, he will see the world of sun-
illumined and clear objects (which represent intelligible reali-
ties), and lastly, though only by an effort, he will be able to
see the sun itself, which represents the Idea of the Good, the
highest Form, ”the universal cause of all things right and
beautiful--the source of truth and reason. " He will then be in
a state of noésis . . .

Plato remarks that if someone, after ascending to the sun-
shine, went back into the cave, he would be unable to see prOperly
because of the darkness, and so would make himself “ridiculous";
while if he tried to free another and lead him up to the light, the
prisoners, who love the darkness and consider the shadows to be
true reality, would put the offender to death, if they could but
catch him. Here we may understand a reference to Socrates,
who endeavoured to enlighten all those who would listen and make
them apprehend truth and reason, instead of letting themselves
be misled by prejudice and SOphistry. 1

This illustration indicates that Plato believed that true progress
is made through patient, enduring effort. He insisted therefore, on
the importance of education by which the young might be trained to
believe in the invisible but eternal realities. Particularly was such
education vital for those who were to be statesmen.

As we study the moral theory of Plato, we find that along with

Soc rates he believed that the summuxn bonum was the develOpment of

 

virtue and the attainment to a knowledge of God. The "ideas" or
"forms" of which Plato Spoke so often were, after all, the ”ideas" of
God; and by becoming aware of these, men could become akin to Deity.
Plato also believed in a future life and the immortality of the soul.

Because of his emphasis upon the soul, the material body seemed to be

 

1C0pleston, pp. 160-162.

’ l - I
.... —.r- 0". “._
.vv 4 ...
' ;r’:. -... bgoc- .1
.av- .
-. .

»

'>o.-- ~'\’
-

d-

. ' c .
.... ..-“ ..4 1 n

. . . .,
..--v ;_ '93. ... .
_.,..;‘ u sacs . 0-.-

. .

~-~.;;..o; D-c- 0.: ~. L

-.--us... on oauL-L -
. ~

- ... , I
o--»--.~...-o.... ..
.

v- —'

 

4
--l‘v-~§..‘..‘.'IO J. ‘.o 9 i
o ' q
o. - - . .
I‘— H. 1.-' - ’1‘ ..
o—uos . . .‘ta;.. a.
.0 . . -. . I
.l ... ‘fl . ‘
n-uo nu--..u sJ . a-
_. _. 1 -
-~ .. . ..
u . h. .>..
“-0~-. -. L.- ...-
t- ' - .’ .
"“"‘“vo , ...!

-~ . . I
‘5; ‘ ‘1‘w—ou
or-..l '

 

 

3O

diSparaged; and this paved the way for the asceticism of offshoot
Christian movements in the early centuries of our era.

It may be that Plato's weakness was history, for it is certain
that deSpite the tragic end of the preceding Periclean age, he accepted
that identification of virtue with knowledge made first by his master.

In the Protagoras Socrates shows, as against the SOphist, that
it is absurd to suggest that justice can be impious or piety
unjust, so that the several virtues cannot be entirely diSparate.
Furthermore, the intemperate man is one who pursues what is
really harmful to man while the temperate man pursues what

is truly good and beneficial. Now, to pursue what is truly good
and beneficial is wise, while to pursue what is harmful is
foolish. Hence temperance and wisdom cannot be entirely dis-
parate. Again, true valour or courage means, e.g. standing
your ground in battle when you know the risks to which you are
exposed; it does not mean mere foolhardiness. Thus courage
can no more be separated from wisdom than can temperance.
Plato does not, of course, deny that there are distinct virtues,
distinguished according to their objects or the parts of the soul
of which they are the habits; but all these distinct virtues form
a unity; inasmuch as they are the expressions of the same
knowledge of good and evil. The distinct virtues are, therefore,
unified in prudence or the knowledge of what is truly good for
man and of the means to attain that good. It is made clear in the
Meno that if virtue is knowledge or prudence, it can be taught,
and it is slfown in the Republic that it is only the philosopher who
has true knowledge of the food for man. It is not the SOphist,
content with "popular" notions of virtue, who can teach virtue,
but only he who has exact knowledge, i. e. the phi1050pher.l

 

 

This concept is an important feature of the Classical heritage.
The classicists believed that man by his own resources could create
a perfect world. Plato' s insistence that true education would bring
virtue as an inevitable accompaniment was to influence men through
all succeeding centuries, and only the shocks of recent global wars

have availed to shake faith in this concept.

 

llbid” pp. 218-219.

.
.. . k
' .. ‘
'0 --“ " 3 ~ Jt
‘o~‘
..-
.....-

.....— K
..c~'.l'-- . ‘6
.- ' ‘l- or

‘ d-O

...-a..— .
‘. .

.- O ‘.

V .o‘r. s v

'i'..-‘ "’ \....o~
:...;—.o.. v0

.—

 

' --O--- P ,
.-.. .... ;-.. F ,.'.
' .l -.-.~ot¢¢”
._‘..

 

n . .‘vu‘nl .>
. -...-.. ‘
. §‘ . 0-. , ._ ._'
.,;......... son-s
"“""o.¢--~ ‘.;— ‘,
. - ‘...... a .
-..... . ..g g. .
.- -
u- ,.
1. . ,. ‘
.- . ”.o-w L ...:
- .ucn.-...o./- ,
' h
n... ‘~..-‘..- ’ ... .
"""‘ ~v\--~-\ L...-
. O
>--.. . . _‘_‘ .
' ’.’ , g'. ..D
~.-¢.ba yd.¢§o~‘\.. . .
.
' .
...A .a.l . . .
g: ‘ w . ,
' “~u m.3‘ o

- “a.

 

 

f“ .
as ...;9 0“. . ...
- . .
tic-....-. . ¥‘;-¢‘...

' n.

.
... . ‘

I Py- 1 .. '
tic ...C “‘2'. ' ..."
«

. p .-.. , ..
a. '.‘. ~\ ‘ 1:
.
"" \o . :_
' '. ’- ....
‘ A
.1 J. G “‘c \ . ...
‘ .
9., - ' .
-. .‘~ ‘. I
~' h.én-I J. kit 0‘ ~
.
3‘:- .
tog. :V“~a ....“
o J..“ J5
‘ " '
s v2 ..., . -
6-..». ..“: ‘. C'-
I ‘ O
.
h

. V
' ..."! V
a, a
..uk..e. .l

 

 

31

It should also be pointed out here that while Plato apparently
taught many principles that bordered on the later Christian teachings,
in this matter of virtue and the possibility of transforming the nature
of man by education he differed radically from Christianity. Paul and
his associates taught the gOSpel of Christ, which declared that only
the intervening grace of God could transform a man's bias towards
evil. Furthermore, we should not endeavour to equate the life result-
ing from Socratic ethics with that which develops from the Christian
heritage. Consider, for example, the implications of Socrates'
frank and unashamed words concerning his desire for the young man
Charmides.

Oh rare'. I caught a sight of the inwards of his garment, and
took the flame, then I could no longer contain myself. I thought
how well Cydias understood the nature of love, when, in Speak-
ing of a fair youth, he woos someone 'not to bring the fawn in
the sight of the lion to be devoured by him', and I felt that I had
been overcome by a sort of wild-beast appetite. But I con-
trolled myself, and when he asked me if I knew the cure of the
headache, I answered but with an effort, that I did know.1

As mentioned on page 26, Platonism as it existed in the first
century A. D. was not identical with that of the fourth and third
centuries B. C.

Plato's own evolution of thought with its final emphasis upon
Orphic and Pythagorean teachings, and its strong religious and ethical
tendencies, pointed the way in which Platonism was to develop.
Members of the "Old Academy" largely dr0pped the doctrine of "Ideas, "
and like Pythagoras emphasized the mystic lore of numbers. This
was followed by the switching of attention to religion and ethics. The
"New Academy" stressed probability rather than idealism. Ultimately

eclecticism became the universal practice; and the Neoplatonism in

 

1Cited by Wilbur M. Smith, Therefore Stand (Boston: w. A.
Wilde Co., 1945), p. 238.

 

v- - ..
. -- uu; p"‘ re
. , n
' t .. ...- A't“ "
..--4 .
. a.
._‘-._~_ ...... ‘0
"“‘uuo . &.-‘ wt
:,,,...¢...‘-.Anl.
..-
‘
pun
. .
'...- ...:o o-u-O 0‘
who' u--. "t "' .

 

- b-.' - In
u's r" \
~'>0~..a- «a n
...«O‘.
,‘ .-
~~~....
-‘ . ‘
.' u.
.- ‘ '- -o 0,. -
.—~ -... J. ‘..t '1_' s
. .
--
-. I
, ' v;-. _ . , - ,
‘uu__.-.c ..‘ Q‘- - .
o . .

. .
m: "i'" J
”NH-Hot 5 ZS" \ d
-a u _

 

.-. mug: -,

u::l- u y C
gate. ”I"...

ire». 1.1.5 3‘36»
““JTEF I," -.

‘ wrr: t;-

V. “rifles

‘. “ wk 0‘ t e “
.. T ‘
...-:3: .... ‘

;:_‘- DEUSE-“

-‘:'I‘;>~ .

' t..c .

57"“ no 315131.;
..q_ .3: 6‘

. ‘ he ;

o :“o ‘ Sc‘e:r

 

 

 

 

32

the time of the Empire was a synthesis of Pythagoreanism, Platonism,

Aristoteleanism, and Stoicism, plus some elements from the Oriental

cults.
In the first century A.D. , Platonism, as such, had slight
appeal. Only as fragments of it reappeared in Stoicism and other

syncretistic systems did it have Significant‘influence.

Aristotle

 

The son of the physician of the Macedonian king, Aristotle was
born in Thrace in 384-3 B. C. At the age of seventeen he went to
Athens and became a member of Plato' 3 Academy. While in later
years Aristotle's own scientific interests came more and more to the
fore, the influence of the metaphysics of Plato never entirely left him.

In 343-2, Aristotle was entrusted with the educating of Alexander.
When the latter ascended the throne, his tutor returned to Athens and
founded his own school in the north-east sector of the city, at the
Lyceum. This school was also known as the Peripotos and thus its

members were called Peripotetikoi. A. year after the death of

 

Alexander the Great, Aristotle also died.

The writings of this philosoPher fall into two groups, (1) the
esoteric, and (2) the pedagogical works. Despite the emphasis upon
the empirical and scientific, Aristotle ever retained his interests in
metaphysics.

Wisdom, therefore, deals with the first principles and
causes of things, and so is universal knowledge in the highest
degree. This means that it is the science which is furthest
removed from the sense, the most abstract science, and so is
the hardest of the sciences as involving the greatest effort of
thought. ”Sense-perception is common to all and therefore
easy and no mark of Wisdom. " But, though it is the most ab—
stract of the sciences, it is, in Aristotle's view, the most
exact of the Sciences, "for those which involve fewer principles

 

.
..;~~‘; ex$:: .. a

o
a
gym-do. so)

 

'1 .
'v~'bu-.‘...' .0-

 

. V
-
:.&. coon--..».Lok ... .

a

.. 1
.. 0” Q ... . .
“no-...- u... .Aa. -u .
" '

’ O O '0
or.-. a. "fi 'v‘
~¥....‘ ... u.» 0.. .. o

v .. .
.-;;..a .. - .. .

 

.“" .‘

 

 

 

 

 

_, 2...; . .
s n W .-
'*‘-b u..-......(__. .
-
..\- .
‘ “..--_ .
~... 1 . p--._
‘ -, P D
o “~O~....{4. ‘ b >

 

...
“.1; " ~~ -.
.¢.C ' K F
... “
"'uo.
O. \ '- .
9‘ ‘0—
IAI“' I. H-
. II.

~. 1., 9
A. 9,.
-.5‘
I. —‘ ."‘
g.‘ H K a ‘
V...‘
D 6'
‘--.°
.az‘. n-o .
““uC. .,_ ‘
. ¢.. .
N o: .
v. .“ 9 _ ‘
" ‘ '5. T“ c - .
...‘
. \_ .
.._ . x. -
“-...
..-‘c: .. _ ‘
m a --
s..
‘0. I
a-
.
\. u _
“‘~'C. _,‘
8‘--“; u
.
' u
‘.‘l.
R. - -
J'Cn 13‘ .
~¢ .‘.~fiv~ H ‘.
fi.‘ J" u.
. “"'C"
s. -
- 5 Q
~\)". _‘
'5 a
«C... o
o. - ‘
. ‘n. .- .
'5‘ ‘-
c -c: ._~ _ ,
' “‘A‘ . .
Q - v}- \

; ...
‘ o
. C“\ ‘0'.
9- a . '
‘ ..-
. ‘~
‘\=: ‘3’-
! 5‘ A’
1': ‘C‘ J: t‘.‘
5‘- . ..
h“~=~“t«
Q‘Jgh ’ .
....“ . ¢ “L,-
-J . . .

e . L -
1‘ C- ’-
4'..- .
n'_:h‘_ .
‘-“-‘H z‘
‘o v
g
L.

 

33

are more exact than those which involve additional principles,
e. g. arithmetic than geometry. " Moreover, this Science is

in itself the most knowable than their applications (for these
depend on the first principles, and not vice versa), though it
does not follow that they are the most knowable in regard to us,
since we necessarily start with the things of sense and it
requires a considerable effort of rational abstraction to proceed
from what is directly known to us, sense-objects, to their
ultimate principles. 1

The ethics of Aristotle are teleological in nature. Whatever
tends to the attainment of good on a man's part is "good. " At the end

of his Nicomachean Ethics he discusses the ideal life, and suggests

 

that it is a life of conduct in accordance with virtue.

. . . virtue, in Aristotle's eyes, is a mean between two extremes,
the extremes being vices, one being a vice through excess, the
other being a vice through defect. Through excess or defect of
what? Either in regard to the feeling of confidence, the excess
of this feeling constitutes rashness--at least when the feeling
issues in action, and it is with human actions that ethics are
concerned--while the defect is cowardice. The mean, then, will
be a mean between rashness on the one hand and cowardice on
the other hand: this mean is courage and is the virtue in resPect
to the feeling of confidence. Again, if we take the action of giv-
ing of money, excessin regard to this action is prodigality--
and this is a vice--while defect in regard to this action is
illiberality. The virtue, liberality, is the mean between the two
vices, that of excess and that of defect. Aristotle, therefore,
describes or defines moral virtue as "a diSposition to choose,
consisting essentially in a mean relatively to us determined by a
rule, i. e. the rule by which a practically wise man would
determine it. "2

It is evident from this quotation that Aristotle clings to the
Socratic concept that virtue and knowledge are linked. The two attributes
when combined would make man an effectual "political animal" as well

as a happy individual. Little wonder, then, that when the great Roman

 

1COpleston, p. 288.
zlbid” p. 336.

 

 

 

r - 1
.
.".. a-
‘U ";2 .CS i..- '
“'.‘_..a-U
....
'. . -.- .. .v
3' "'-"- c at.
L ..u-
.... ...
.
‘ v OI I
I --- --_ fi-.'- ‘ .
. .
,:::.:;..- t-....t.-
I
' "P .23.: ..
,. '-
:‘E...:-..~ v. ,.
. .
'~ .--0 ...- ’." .h.. .
a
"‘ ‘-‘d‘-‘ a- .4.. u..- .
- .
- .
".' -'; ...:L.‘ i. 5 out I
"“" ...- ”.....- .. -
. ‘u-u- . - l
. U.- a .4
.tm-u-=.'..-’u._..\ .
. . -
”3;.-‘p o _-‘_; .. ’
I. ICOU¥Cc ‘~‘.\“. .‘ .
. v
s, ......m ;.,.,_g . .
...‘..‘.1 -““‘L .“. ‘
... ~
. -~.. ,. .
-.:. ‘1, . .- P2 ., .-
.. v-A‘. -‘-¢.5‘ ..._-
..
\. t
‘ "Ht-.... .
‘I' -‘ u“~ a. “ .
. ‘CI‘"“‘,~:‘ .4. ‘5
.
A‘ ‘
"..-
. ‘ . - I
.u""'-Iuc " E‘~ V - e
at ‘0‘ ‘ .
o.._: .
~-
"21"3J'v“ D" ..- _
“ s .
I ..lJ-snt .\..‘ fl."
‘ I
u -. . .
I -.
‘ g .-
..‘. “so - .
.x4~¥..a...:ut. ‘

 

 

34

poets depicted the role of the Empire, it was with emphasis upon
these two features as the ideals which could implement a Utopia.
Virgil and Horace were both students of the writings of the ancient
Greeks and entirely familiar with the emphases of Plato and Aristotle.

Nevertheless, Aristoteleanismis S_l_l_glr-l_, like Platonism, had
little impact upon the first century A. D. After the philosopher's
death, his treatises were lost for over two hundred years; and as a
result the Peripatetic school rapidly forgot the Spirit of its master and
developed a logical tradition of its own. Some influential teachers in
the Lyceum swung far away from their master in certain teachings.
Aristoxenus denied the immortality of the intellect, and Strato re-
pudiated the existence of God. A gradual division of scientific effort
also characterized post-Aristotelian phiIOSOphy. Even when the works
of Aristotle were recovered (80 B.C.), they were regarded more as a
body of complete knowledge than as a stimulus to inquiry.

Aristotelianism affected classical antiquity much less than did
the tradition of Plato, and during the time of the development and
stabilization of the Empire it was the Latin poets who expressed far
more of the sentiments of the age than did its philosoPhers.

The Epicurean and .Stoic contemporaries of the classical poets,
however, looked in other directions. It is these two schools which are
particularly mentioned in the New Testament, and this alone is

indicative of the pre-eminence assumed by them in the first century.l

Epicureanism

 

After Aristotle, the tendency to Speculation declined, and

philosophy became more practical in essence. Virtue and happiness

 

1See Acts 17 .

 

o
V , -0
.._..v--

,o.;. ..c“: v: t

...-n... ' h
. . - ¢"'..’ -

-- -. ., .- t
u... ...v ‘Oh‘ ...---
"__ . . ..- nw '

v. ".'-r- .k
-_o .w-""

v

.19 — '.
u». " ..I ‘
~ Jvaana's"
.

.—

..... “—0.. ~-

‘ —

--.-...-.u| dtt‘tt-A ...-

~-..o,.. . . .

.-..J."-.- "o: '* '
' .nb‘ a. s...» kb4 ‘

'a' ;6..-.

 

... ‘ c..-o-,~.
f'nfios‘. ~‘:a:.oa: ..
.. ‘~ -
.: ..’:.: ‘,. _'_ _.
7 “‘Uw-n» ‘.\C c U.
a.
.-tAv .
.‘I
..- 4-
~H-~‘ods "" ' ‘
‘ so» J.. .
o
.
" h‘A -
_. ...._~ v-‘v --
. .
. " ta.utoa{... ’
_ .

I
V A
0._ -
- — na-~.
‘ .“ u-
. -
~i~~‘.J‘ figs :0 ‘
...-
O
‘h:.. v
'~._.~. . 0' .‘ U
‘. I D
‘~ ... but '
... -
....~ .
I “'r-I‘.. .c-‘ .’ ‘
. . -.‘.t. ‘;r 09-“
.aak.
‘L‘ h
IA
\.:'3:;b "L
V. ' We ‘
- ‘ out . " '
.O I...
.
‘

 

 

35

were its themes, and the problem of human life on earth was the basis
of discussion. Religious questions, including those of providence

and the existence of evil, came to the fore. There was a new stress
upon the significance of the individual. When we look for the causes

of this changed direction, it seems apparent that the political revolu-
tions of the times as described earlier were re3ponsible. The collapse
of the Greek political communities, the conquests of Alexander, the new
familiarity between East and West with consequent fusion--all these
contributed to the change in the mode of thinking. No longer did the

old political systems appear as the center. of man's life. At this time,
the emphasis given by Socrates to ethical inquiry was. reaffirmed. ,

Epicurus was born a generation later than Aristotle in 341 B. C.
Early in his eXperience he studied under the followers of Plato and
Democritus, but by 307 B. C. he had opened his own School at Athens.
While Epicurus was a voluminous writer, only fragments of his work
remain. It is in the Latin poet Lucretius (91-51 B. C.) that we have
the populariser for the Roman world of the thought of the Aegean
philosopher. The many extant manuscripts of the poet witness to the
wide-Spread favor he received in his own day.

For Epicurus, life's main concern was Ethics. Even his theories
of physics were significant only in so far as they subserved the princi-
ples of the conduct of life. He believed that all knowledge came via
the senses, and that the ultimate reality in the universe was matter.

In effect his scheme amounted to practical atheism. While he believed
in the gods, they were beings who in no wise influenced the world.

It is the atomic theory of Democritus, asserted Epicurus, not the gods,
which explains the origin of the universe. To this philos0pher, the
first fundamental criterion of truth is Perception, and the second is

provided by Concepts or memory-images. The third criterion grows

  

' O
. '1‘. . l .,
D
...... n : ot5"".
.on
,.......M

, I

' --l w' ’

. ... -¢9 ‘
"t 'P ’t....‘ Jo Jo---
.. I..- 0- ~ .

. i
... - .A- n ‘2‘. U.- U
‘ ' - ' a.
......n- u.‘.. ...“ ...

, - u
v."’.';-‘ ‘D; L P Ft
Ions-ytndplfi. -.a- bo-

. v

. n t . .

v'r. .. n 3:, - ..

.‘fla-§OOOUOI -o .- ~

I - o .-
... .. ’. .. .
.. ‘ ' G
- ....- nug A... a-..
v .
- -0. .. .. _

‘p ‘5. ‘

-‘~-\---. ...I_.

«t o .
'Q. ... _ .' . ' '
...- A‘ ~ . F,. J
. -“‘ " Ioo\ '

'fi .0 0p. . _

‘

" .

.J".‘ “0‘ hen-aaLl-‘u‘

o

O~ o..- N_ ... ..

‘v . ‘ a n

... ‘h 90“ \ I.

 

.
..‘, .
\ v~o
“v:- : ‘.‘ “‘
.

..
"‘--vu:

 

 

 

36

logically out of the'preceding. It is the feelings which afford criteria

 

for conduct. The feeling of pleasure indicates what we should choose,
while the feeling of pain warns us as to what should be avoided. Thus
Epicurus could say that "the criteria of truth are the senses, and the
preconceptions, and the passions. "1

Superstition was the great enemy of mankind, according to
Epicurus and his followers.

Lucretius says, "He (Epicurus) passed on far beyond the flam-
ing walls of the world and traversed throughout in mind and
Spirit the immeasurable universe whence he returns a conqueror
to tell us what can and what cannot come into being; in Short, on
what principle each thing has its powers defined, its deepest
boundary mark. Therefore religion (as p0pularly understood)

is put under foot and trampled upon in turn; his victory brings

us level with heaven. " 2

Superstitious fears interfere with peace of mind and prevent
pleasure, which is the true good, says this philOSOpher. Such an
assertioh made it inevitable that, like other founders of thought,
Epicurus be often misconstrued. He neither urged or himself practiced
extreme sensual or licentious conduct.

The question then arises what Epicurus understands by pleasure,
when he makes it the end of life. Two facts are to be noted:
first, that Epicurus meant, not the pleasures of the moment,
individual sensations, but the pleasure which endures throughout
a lifetime; and secondly, that pleasure for Epicurus consisted
rather in the abs e'nce of pain than in positive satisfaction. This
pleasure is to be found pre-eminently in serenity of soul

(5 tés psuchés ataraxia ‘). With this serenity of soul Epicurus
c-onjs-i-ned also health of body, but the emphasis is rather on
intellectual pleasure, for, while very severe bodily pains are of
short duration, less severe pains may be overcome or rendered
endurable by intellectual pleasures. ". . . A correct theory . . .

 

 

1Copleston, p. 403. Diog. Laert., 10, 31.

 

2Shirley Jackson Case, The Evolution of Early Christianity
(Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1927), pp. 258-259.

 

 

n . .-.-:g a ’3‘. ;‘--‘
" v " ’J.'.o. ...
....-lbd
b D
.
.
.
un- '
..-...
~
-- .- - ‘- ... .1
‘ "f ;:..”|— t
.44.... i-uvhb- ‘. o.
.
. .V I
. - o . o - .'
'," :‘V' P It to"
"--~.--..~ ops-0.5 y..5 ..
' 0 q .
‘o-.-0-. - , k
‘ ' I ’v- 0- L. o
"""hwb. u» a... . ,

 

‘

....q .

w. l. I; .’,' '

hu... v v.4». ".‘ 0‘
s

-

-.. ..

'. "’ up- _.

.-

..“'~--
. ‘\\ h .
-‘\b~.v

..f" F... .

 

WK .
A. Moor‘.‘ .- .1. .
h o .-
p
\I..-_: J. P" ‘l. ' 0
. .05.. p. ‘ t
' -~ 6 ._
“ "W--. . Q . .
...,_.;u .‘J- ,'~ .’ ,
u._ ... ‘.. .
~

_'~.,‘ .

'~ :vf' 9-.

"" “- v.3" ‘ " 2
H4“

‘
‘ ...»Vt.‘

3" .
s ‘ .
\“d‘ a-"
"H J. E‘- O- ‘ .
t o 5" ..:> v
‘9

 

 

37

can refer all choice and avoidance to the health of the body and
the freedom from disquietude of the soul. ” ". . . at times we
pass over many pleasures when any difficulty is likely to ensue
from them; and we think many pains better than pleasures when
a greater pleasure follows them, if we endure the pain for a
time. ”1

Some aSpects of the moral teaching of Epicurus were less selfish
or egocentric than the theoretical foundations of his ethic might indicate.
For instance, he believed it was more pleasant to do a kindness than to
receive one. With the passing of years, however, it was inevitable
‘ that many who called themselves Epicureans should practice their
phiIOSOphy on a lower level. The masses could understand better the
concessions implied by this philos0phy rather than its somewhat demand-
ing ideals. When Montesquieu asserts that some of the corruption of
the Roman world in the first century could be attributed to the spread
of Epicureanism, he is not without supporters.2 "The founders of this
school led virtuous lives, but the doctrine contained no motives of
sufficient power to restrain in the passions of men generally, and, in
the progress of time, showed its real tendencies. "3

The extent to which Epicureanism pervaded the Graeco-
Roman world in the first century A. D. is difficult now to
determine. The school certainly maintained itself on down to
the fourth century of our era. It doubtless had a considerable
following still in the first century, for no other sect stood so
positively by its original tenets, refusing to yield to the
eclectic tendencies prevalent in that age. It continued to be the
relentless foe of superstition, as we learn in the second century

 

lC0pleston, p. 407.

2Montesquieu, Considerations on the Causes of the Grandeur and
Decadence of the Romans, trans. by Jehu Baker (New York: D. Apple-

 

 

ton and Company, 1882), p. 197.

3'George P. Fisher, The Beginnings of Christianity (New York:
Charles Scribner's Sons, 1877), p. 162. Hereafter referred to as
Beginnings.

 

 

..-.-'
4

I ."
‘sO‘ot .0; ' -

.--v;v
Q...- .-

. » .' _ __ r
.-b'v'_.‘.' .‘flcl‘; .H:

N... ......t

. .
a ‘ ‘
at fie”; oo‘ ....- o L .
.

.
... .- -I'- r‘
.-‘ v,‘- w.-

-p...- ‘.... .no ..oa. - v

n
...... ...

.. '~-- ‘. v
¢.;t. Oil D-g‘.u.
a . .

-. . . o
n; -;“O“; “ "
.
.us .b&.-‘u J. I.-
. ... I Q
....‘_._,. . .
“a I A" ‘.
o)..¢..o...-..g a..- 9- .‘. o
Q ‘ .
.... ...
. _’ _ _ ‘oyn ‘0’; --
‘O~---OUo .. d..a-..... ...
... ' I
...““’ V"" ~4
. a . . ‘ n“ v
"- . u. ‘ ‘ ‘
. ' ‘.~-~ J. . ...

-.
».l .
...._
...: .Q‘ 0...;
v 5.. ... §
:; . u .' a.
‘ h,
...... .u ."c ~._;. ‘
o.._. \. .
»

.; $‘u- _
.-...c~:tv~o-.‘.v. ’
. . 5- , _-
\y: ..
"I
7.-. ..
h p, .
5“,), “‘: :-:_.“-
.VH. D'
.4

 

 

38

when Lucian makes the Epicureans bitter enemies of the
charlatan Alexander. Probably its greatest religious signifi-
cance lies in its severe protest against popular superstition,
it being in this reSpect the precursor of Christianity. But the
Epicurean method of removing the malady proved quite inade-
quate for popular needs. . . . 1

The records of history indicate that it was the phi1030phies of
Epicureanism and Stoicism particularly which undermined the belief
of influential Romans in the classical system of values. The result
was a paralysis of community Spirit and its consequent contribution to

the deterioration of the Empire.

Stoicism

 

This was the most influential and popular of all philosophical
systems in the first century A.D. Seneca (4-65 A. D.), Epictetus
(60-110 A.D.), and the Emperor Marcus Aurelius (121-180 A.D.) were
able representatives of Stoicism in the early days of Christianity.

‘Zeno, the founder of the early Stoic school, was a contemporary
of Epicurus, but he was not a Greek. He was born in Cyprus about
336-35 B.C. , and came to Athens about 315-313 B. C. He became
successively the admirer of Socrates and of Crates the Cynic, and then
in the year 300 B. C. Zeno established his own school. According to
tradition he committed suicide about 264-3 B. C. at Athens.

In order to form a correct conception of Stoicism we must
remember (1) that it is not merely a phi1030phy and a system of
ethics, but a religion raised upon the ruins of p0pular polythe-
ism; (2) that its founder and its most ardent disciples trace their
origin either to Semitic Asia or to Roman Italy; (3) that it is not
the work of a single individual, but a collection of doctrines
from different sources which meet in one and the same channel
like the tributaries of a river. Hence its conservatism in
religion and its dogmatism in metaphysics. Hence also its
practical turn, and, finally, the complex and wholly eclectic
nature of its teachings.Z

 

lCase, p. 262.

2Alfred Weber, History of Philos0phy, trans. by Frank Thilby
(New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1896), p. 141.

 

' _,...‘0 nnwfi‘l'v-
. ..I. K..-a..l-"

-‘h“‘ a
.

. .
" '. n h
\D~"~‘ .'-
-..;nmv-Ik

- a ..-. r 0

...-0;. " ‘4 g
I L“- I
. I
.. t.. ’
_,..;..c_-p nv'flfi' '
~ohouoc ‘L~ H' "'
. o

. .
«...... 4"”,2. -~

I ..
...--.. '- Qoos u-.~
.

. . A -
r":"‘.- R '1} c..-
...-roach ‘. a, »

-

. ._ ,
5;... .- .’ ..
Dvo.~.a‘. .Jp".a v...

.

.
.. . .‘ '.
3 - ... ’0' - C‘ ‘
0......‘ ...».n . u ‘
v -
° I
0.. -... ...

n ‘ v-
“: us;.e “- v! ‘.:
.

..

.. .....-g _' k.-
“...; M-I'C.0-nc.. ‘2'
~
; "“' H.n.-.'.
' 6"" 90......
.

n ..
. "‘
..-_.‘

.-L - -

~ -“ at ~~~O . - ,__

...”... ,. _‘. ...
. .

r‘ ' o I..- ,

 

';-o-. .W .' .
I . . _
.-«o‘ J:..C-: J: o
E... -- . .
u " 9'.
~‘ "‘\c 3‘ ‘-.- :‘V
~
_ g
a g -
lung-co.» J. sects-:2 .u'
9
"'-b. .
0- ~ .
its:§._r‘s 3. ‘,. .
‘ ll-.. ‘
Ԥ ... t
p v... __~
‘1. .“‘ a. c. ‘- II
. “k-.¢. .D‘
..
“:5" ~1~.,_
v‘ . ‘0‘ ~
u EVA-4‘ .‘6 . I
no A.
‘: ....
“It.“ t‘Oc tfl‘g; _ t
q. '
'5... .
Nb: a...” h‘ I
1 as.. “ t .0,
‘ V It
...
H; ‘v-
.v‘...“ 3. v ..
‘0.
‘ l .k ‘5—
;'..‘V-\ ’ '
a O _
\n.‘t fier .1. _ .
v 0“ ..IC .
Fl‘ ‘
~G -.-
““ Qua. .“ ..
J..._,

...."'V
‘I.
“'u. x:
H 9" Z A. .. .
en, a”. r
a.“
‘, ‘
Ade o-‘ .
‘4-
LJALISV‘H‘ J : .
.. «J;
Jib...
eit‘sm p‘
1a.- I
. |bJ
O‘K. b
" 1‘; .‘
.i \‘
.. .4
”A; u ‘
H‘) CW.” ‘
\g Q‘
\,L\.~ .
\‘tt, ‘ti
‘ Q
S Q 1‘w-{_
\ “ '.‘ _‘
a. ...
w: "-. ‘ , ._

 

 

39

Lightfoot compares the systems of Epicurus and Zeno thus:

Stimulated by the same need, Epicurus and Zeno strove
in different ways to solve the problem which the perplexities
of their age presented. Both alike, avoiding philosoPhy in the
proper sense of the term, concentrated their energies on
ethics: but the one took happiness, the other virtue, as his
supreme good, and made it the starting-point of his ethical
teaching. Both alike contrasted with the older masters in
building their systems on the needs of the individual and not of
the state: but one strove to satisfy the cravings of man, as a
being intended by nature for social life, by laying stress on the
'claims and privileges of friendship, the other by expanding his
Sphere of duty and representing him as a citizen of the world or
even of the universe. Both alike paid a certain respect to the
waning beliefs of their day: but the one without denying the
existence of the gods banished them from all concern in the
affairs of men, while the other, transforming and utilizing the
creations of Hellenic mythology, identified them with the powers
of the physical world. Both alike took conformity to nature as
their guiding maxim: but nature with the one was interpreted to
mean the equable balance of all the impulses and faculties of
man, with the other the absolute supremacy of the reason, as
the ruling principle of his being. And lastly; both alike sought
refuge from the turmoil and confusion of the age of the inward
calm and composure of the soul. If Serenity (ataraxia) was the
supreme virtue of the one, her twin sister Passionlessness
(apathia) was the sovereign principle of the other.1

 

We shall concern ourselves chiefly with Stoicism as it was in the
days of Seneca, remembering that this is a modification of the earlier
Stoicism of Zeno and Chrysippus.

The Stoicism of the first century A. D. was a fOrm of pantheistic
materialism. Plato's "forms" are emphatically rejected. Mind and
body are simply two a5pects of one and the same reality. As for the
universe, it is a living being, it is God, and it governs our destinies.
"The world, proceeding by evolution from the primitive fire, eventual-

ly returns to its source through a universal conflagration, and the

 

1J. B. Lightfoot, Dissertations on the Apostolic Age (London?
Macmillan and Company, 1882), pp. 251-252.

 

 

0'. n.
.. .... ... . . ... .
.P. . P. . n F v 0
..o .a o; .s.‘ w. o .. ... Os
.u 0 . O
.t o. o . .u. .- . . (N
.. x .: a. .. . \. ... .
.v. .. a. .s .u. t .. . .
... .v .. .h . . .. ... ”J on .u. e . .
... . u“ o. 9. o. uu F. . H; ..
... .J 5. . A4. .5 .. ... .4 —. . . ,n
_. .. .3 ... .... .-. c ... .
.u. . . .a- C. r n‘q .a
._~ .r- .. v. .. .k. u“ .c ._‘o ”C
as. .“ .oo 0 s ... . uh.“ ... .0“
...u u... ._ .... ..\.. .. o. é.» ..
. \u. . ~w p . .M V‘. ~FM I:
.. . . __ ... ... .n . an o . .
. . v” . ... . .. ..
. .... .. .. .. J“ .J. t
u 1 ..~ .wo 9- . i
.. ... .. . . a .
o . . . ‘ p .-
... . . ...
.. .

 

40

same process is to be renewed in an endless series of cycles. "1

Because every man is a part of Deity, the chief end of his
existence is virtuous living. Virtue is conformity to the Will of the
Universe, and in the Logos, divine Reason, is to be found the com-
mon bond uniting all mankind. "Since God is thus the father of all,
all men are brothers, and all class distinctions are only artificial
barriers to be removed by religion rather than by social revolution. "2
Stoicism asserts that the truly wise man will show little concern for
apparently unfavourable circumstances, for these are transitory, and
viewed in the context of all time, they are in reality benevolent.
According to Seneca, whatever happens is to be accepted as a reve-
lation of the divine will. Thus the way to freedom is the attainment
of virtue by the will's acquiescence to all of life's disturbances.

Happy is the sage, who, versed in the secrets of nature, knows
himself and others; whom this knowledge frees from the guardian-
ship of men, the times, social prejudices, and the laws them-
selves, in so far as they are the products of human caprice and
not of reason. . . . He alone is truly free; he has overcome the
world as well as his own passions. Nothing can affect him nor
make him falter; neither the happenings of the world nor the
storms in his own heart. Let come what come may, he is re-
signed; for everything is decreed by Nature and Fate; and Nature
and Fate are synonymous with Reason, Providence, and good
Will. Hence, the supreme rule which he observes in all things:
sequi naturam, to follow nature, that is, the law which is
identical with the law that governs the world. . . .3

 

The serenity aimed at by the Stoic could be attained only by
eradicating the passions as much as possible. Such a belief was the

logical consequence of the determination to follow Reason.

 

1Fisher, p. 162.
2Case, p. 269.
3Weber, p. 146.

P‘ 2‘. "‘." '
......
A o
' ' - -v-
.' --.... J. ' ‘
~ ’- J .-.. --’
c
-..-”~-
-
. .-..-»o~. "
u~ ‘
"...: .: ...-o... ..

...-a .
c- - '- 0 '- .
.9. r e-
h‘ b I. ‘0 O -

. . . , . _ '-
.r a . -’
utoo in- .\u s a .
u . . _
"'." D' a- .-
o- .v .
‘t.s “5.- h.) ..J‘

'.—" " -v- "‘I-o‘ b
VÂ¥..-'t o.: 7... t J
.

0

"':" " ~ . O~
l-a-d.o “--. L, ._
""Q . . .

.""r" h v'.
.ngt......‘, .a. y
n . I u ‘
.. -
‘ u u n - g

p r

‘CL C.... “1;...

...-o. . ‘
:~.~as.J:. \;:‘._‘ L
9» .':,

...: «'::t ”... r~

CIocv-“

«I... " - '
4 "IH-..
5‘. "~r .
u ‘.I“.: S‘Jf‘
.
‘Sn- _
. v s.
.t. .J,,” .. ...
o
F.¢‘
3.0:: ' ‘ ,
2 ' “‘ snL ‘
. w
n ,' .
.4 3a,: ‘60 .P r
“ O .0: g. '
' "o.
u . .
~‘U.,' ‘Iuo
“can“... 3: "v
- ‘
‘.n.. 1
““ I
4.». b. .“c - ‘fi‘ ‘
”'c‘ ...“
~._
“it. u;- Q
. .... ‘c :0 0,: Q
5.:
g L
'n‘, .
~ .
s ‘ A; o. .
.‘
"‘ u “* a.
..C‘...C:. .‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

41

Thus mirth, sorrow, anger, and their kindred are weaknesses of
which a good Stoic should be ashamed, but for the fact that the feeling
of shame is unstoical and is therefore also to be eschewed.

When the Stoic directed his gaze toward the future, he
again found himself at variance with popular tradition. Of
hell and its terrors he had no fear. These morbid fancies
were held to be impossible for the phiIOSOpher who did not
believe in any black darkness awaiting the dead--"there is no
prison house, no lake of fire or river of forgetfulness, no
judgment, no renewal of the rule of tyrants. " The fate of man's
soul after death is determined by the nature of the soul's con-
stitution. Since it is a part of the ethereal substance called
the divine mind, or God, it must be immortal in the same sense
that divine substance is immortal. This fundamental notion
left room for wide variations of Opinion as to the different
stages in the soul's career. 1

The belief in the common brotherhood of man led the Stoics to
entertain many benevolent and humanitarian ideals. These come very
close to the maxims of Christianity. Probably such ethics owed their
origin more to the Socratic Schools than to the Stoic physical and meta-
physical theories. Typical of Seneca's statements regarding the social
relations of man are the following:

You must live for another, if you would live for yourself.

For what purpose do I get myself a friend? That I may have one
for whom I can die, one whom I can follow into exile, one whom
I can shield from death at the cost of my own life.

I will so live, as if I knew that I was born for others, and will
give thanks to nature on this score.

They are slaves, you urge; nay, they are men. They are slaves;
nay, they are comrades. They are slaves; nay, they are humble
friends. They are slaves; nay, they are fellow- slaves, if you
reflect that fortune has the same power over both. Let some of
them dine with you, because they are worthy; others, that may
become worthy.

 

1Case, p. 276.

.
.-.~

.0
‘b»-- ° “ :"e .
4-:.: .1 :.-~ "
.
.. ' 0
,"....o- 0".2'
a“ a~:\: uv ov“"
.”'.I-‘-V ~2".'
h.u.s.ou-°‘ """-
U

I
. - _ ~‘h‘ " "
o "
.5-..¢ ....C.- o. v-"
-- ’
.. ...CO -9~
...C no: \ n .-
~ -‘
0Q ... - “
5 v . -'V ".-‘ 5.
o~._-¢~‘. .90.. .
h l
. v
.....~ - o -.
_ .- 4 p- v-
o~¢m..y.-h.‘a do n--
O
.' I .
s .- .
p. c ...,‘I “"
'i-Aobo. \g.»| ot‘l.
’0 - ..‘ .--
. , v . -v-
, s
..4- ~.suot-:c--o, '
.
. !
r
0a.]; ...-H . -.. -
F'- _. '
~$ ...-not v. u. .
pa. ,. ”...
~-...~~. J...

 

 

42

He is a Slaye, you say. Yet perchance he is free in Spirit.
He is a Slave. Will this harm him? Show me who is not.

One is a Slave to lust, another to avarice, a third to ambition,
all alike to fear. 1

Concerning many parallels which exist between statements from
Seneca and others from the New Testament, Lightfoot has written:

The first impression made by this series of parallels is
striking. They seem to Show a general coincidence in the
fundamental principles of theology and the leading maxims in
ethics: they exhibit moreover Special resemblances in imagery
and expression, which, it would seem, cannot be explained as
the result of accident, but must point to some historical
connexion.

Nevertheless a nearer examination very materially
diminishes the force of this impression. In many cases, where
the parallels are most close, the theory of a direct historical
connexion is impossible; in many others it can be Shown to be
quite unnecessary; while in not a few instances the resemblance,

however strildng, must be condemned as illusory and fallacious. 2

Possibly in Seneca we have an illustration of the fact that

Stoicism while high-sounding in theory was somewhat less in practice.

Seneca was a despicable man. . . . he was a cowardly
man, and in consequence an odious flatterer; and he used his
position to acquire enormous riches, a fact which made his
perpetual references to the simple life academic, even though
he did not live a self-indulgent life himself. Having flattered
Claudius as long as he lived, he lost no time, after the Emperor's
death, in writing a funny but Spiteful skit on his experience in
Hades. In fact Seneca had great talent but no sincerity. . . .

3
Beyond all doubt, examples could be multiplied of those who failed to
abide by the Christian philosophy eSpoused in the same century, but
the evidence indicates that Christianity generally brought with it a
moral power and motivation that transcended Stoicism and'all other

contemporary philosoPhy or religions.

 

lLightfoot, p. 263.
21bid., pp. 272-273.

3Lawrence Waddy, Pax Romana and World Peace (London:
Chapman and Hall, 1950), p. 211.

I.... ._ " ‘
A‘ ‘rh- -- .'
...- o. .4-..':_-,_1' ‘
.
o..,' __ ' .
v .n- . .— .
n s '-
u-A... -.‘u an... ;,
ap- .
h' , _
.-:'~::--—;r.-l.
“.“.V”"“fiu
.
‘v '
. ;..._ _ -
‘1. ‘ I ° ». _
mouth. ‘ b“ ~ v
I..
o
7.. ;-o.._" , ,
"0...: Z ‘I;..'
.. _ _
IS‘L..C
V -
f... . . '
.4-
“~ “'1: 3:1“!- ...

 

w
p..

" w . ~p.
.3 "Nu ~‘4"‘- --

-:_~‘

' .
."-.\ “1"“. ‘
. “l‘;‘.‘ PP.-.
- kaACc. ...: .1.
A21\"“- ‘

‘pI. ‘ Qv. .
‘::~\.~.. ‘5.
I¢.ua . . ‘
6‘“ u: - 'u
“0.
'“«:.“'e
I- V
‘~ r-
pc‘d-~:;E

I._ ,
. .
ti 1-

 

-o.o I-‘UQ -_‘ n- .' .
‘oo‘- ...-'5‘... J. 0.5—0 ..

.‘-..D-.. .0 - I ‘
a .l 0 ' :
u..-.o.L at § v“ -
. Q
0 . - -
a .I.'.; 1“ h‘f" '.
“,5 . u‘ “d’o na-
. .
. . a -- -
.. a. A ,1 rl‘ v
5.4- .... ... ... tun—A. -
. . . -
n;:.;'- 0—...“ O'- ‘ D-
-....s s-Iu..4 5.. -.

o. -..-...

n a.--..,
.

..
.O -n ‘
‘ ‘0‘.\¢~.JD .\

...

 

 

 

 

43

The Greek 50phia was entirely devoid of power over the will

and heart of mankind. It remained purely theoretical and
abstract: it could do nothing for men, it was the property of

a few, and had no effect, or a miserably inadequate effect on

the life and character of those few. Where it did to some

degree touch the heart and affect the life of some rare individual,
it produced a philosoPhic and affected prig rather than a true
man; and in the case of some of its most elegant exponents,

such as Seneca, there was a woeful contrast in Spirit between
their words and their life. 1

The relationship between the fundamental premises of the promi-
nent schools of philOSOphy and the higher ethics sometimes inculcated
was actually a fragile one. There were unresolved contradictions
within the basic theories. For example, while Epicureanism saw the
folly oqueeking after the short-term pleasures and inculcated, instead,
long term gratifications, this was done with the awareness that life's
brevity might cheat man at last. The greater the "long view" of
pleasures, the greater the threat from nature that the realization of
these joys might be interrupted. Such uncertainty could not but con-
tribute to the paralysis of the moral life, for no argument exists to
convince the unbeliever in immortality that death is a long-term
pleasure.

The following words apply not only to the Greeks but also to the
Roman devotees of Epicureanism and Stoicism.

In the Greek Anthology, Hope and Fortune are two companion
goddesses who make a Sport of human life. The future indeed
hung like a heavy cloud over the ancient world, charged with
catastrophes, reversals. of fortune, the wreck of states, the
breaking up of homes, exile and death. In the face of these
uncertainties the virtue of the Greeks was Resignation rather
than Hope, a cheerful acceptance of the godS' will, without any
joyful or assured anticipations.‘2

 

lSmith, p. 237.
2Ibid., p. 243.

 

.
_ _',- o.
1-..J--£ ..

f'...'-~---r~ .h: fl'l
_ ... ~40
v.“ 0“ E

s ;.o.: ‘V‘.’; .L'... v.» :-
s.u.. -.nv.

a“... nno'I

- u 0
“'I;-w-;' *c' 0r" ."‘
m- «a... .6 boon \ co~

. . . ‘

...,:,, .-.... 3.. "‘r- rs.—

.« ....i. .3... ‘ L¢.\ .- ~
- e

'5 ...». . 0‘ O ‘3

. v'~ ho '-

'\ ...J:-. 1.5

‘l. - V .-
, “F.:., .
”“‘ ‘Itsaak.

.
'£‘ ‘~;.
-~" DAL...

“n~- . ,
. ..F D“‘
~-n.».......[

v
Q»-

-~o. .
n o. .
u...s..v.;s ~_ "

--...‘.,

A, ““i a
khan: a: n...
V v.
\
.;' - ‘ .
‘Ib 1.1" CJ.;: ‘t’
1:?zhv . -.-
‘~.l Carts, C
(..h .
.J3.c\ e: F... fl . ,
. ‘ ” " J1 1:.
...; I.
‘le . “ ~
I L3 £321.:
Dr‘e:- ‘-
¢ \ " - ,‘
o u... 1..ec: G11.
"‘u ‘ .

‘MJ'ZD ‘ .V

_‘ :1: 3. L56 :3:
T'Ya .; ‘

“(nu It CIJ‘ r: F‘ .
u‘ " ‘3JL
0"“...
tq‘:‘lt

r—_-‘
-—'-__
__'-—"

__

_

—

 

 

44

Those in the first century who had the greatest insight into the Sig-
nificance of the basic postulates of the current phiIOSOphieS are also
to be numbered amongthe most pessimistic of all thinkers.

Concluding the review of this phase of men's thought in the first
century, we would repeat that philosoPhy was not then a great force.
While it is true that many elements reappeared in syncretistic creedS,
for the most part the chief. Greek philosophies had been relegated to
the background by the pressures of scepticism, sterility, and material-
ism. Abstract thought had little appeal for the proletariat, and most
Roman aristocrats preferred to listen to the verses of Horace and Livy
rather than concentrate upon the somewhat involved doctrine of Plato
or Aristotle, or, to a lesser. extent, of Zeno or Epicurus.

Nevertheless, the philosophy of the age had several Significant
historical functions to perform as indicated in the following reference.

The Greek PhilosoPhy was a preparation for Christianity
in three ways. It dissipated, or tended to dissipate, the super-
stitions of polytheism; it awakened a sense of need which
philos0phy of itself failed to meet; and it so educated the intel-
lect and conscience as to render the Gospel apprehensible, and,
in many cases, congenial to the mind. It did more than remove
obstacles out of the way; its work was positive as well as nega-
tive. It originated ideas and habits of thought which had more
or less direct affinity with the religion of the Gospel, and which
found in this religion their proper counterpart. The pr0phetic
element of the Greek philosoPhy lay in the glimpses of truth
which it could not fully discern, and in the obscure and unconscious
pursuit of a good which it could not definitely grasp. 1

Religion in the Graeco-Roman World

Some general comments regarding Roman religion have been made

in the discussion concerning the motivation which lay behind the new

 

lFisher, p. 140.

.
‘| ~-": ML
0 " In
‘3 )5 ..-G“' -‘-.
-

...

oh ‘ .‘-Q""
.- v,., .I .
. o ‘ _.
vi" . ”.0 ."'L-
d..- -
.-.

' -Q U .
. ..C'. c 0_
';..~ ----~ :
J '
. ,
. I" .-o...-. O
...... ,-
' . V -

0
U. .... .A‘u“. ‘0
.4“...

.' ‘ . - .0
-O..-

0 Oh

-'--‘-‘n ,

‘- n~ooduo .1. 5.0: u‘\vo'oo

o
. . o:
- .-- .. ,. ‘
I ... - fl 9.. ...
And-..-..- LIA . ~ to

.. '
tray. ‘. .

.. .
;~ .’ h. ..
..........-..¢ fi - ‘ ‘
n‘otu- ~v-0 ‘. '...
'E.= m-¢‘-0‘ J‘ "
' . " 1
can; u a ‘ '
P ‘
\.~.4c £. o~ , ‘
\-
~
‘ .
fl - ”s- Q".
\hg-vu -.. - n o u
h . '
n-b- - o " -'
“ ~ 3 l . ‘
oy.a.s. U. Goo tho 0.
'w- .-...a .9
but... ‘osuv‘b ..na —..
I. ‘-
‘ ‘;:--.'~ ... n
G‘- c\--u.-.‘ ... 1 .
. 'A ’ . . ~
k‘ .-...A.._.‘ ,
~v-o-a.~t.. . ..
.v
..
‘ .- \9.. ‘F , . .
O" .
... u :IJIK‘.‘ 1;: _
.-
\u"“€'- fit Or-
va...\.:k. ... \ ‘. 9.
' .
s ... "x
p Ry. .
«.15.. AT fi'" In '
‘-‘I .‘v
.-

. A‘.--
Eflu ‘.
~6sb.::.\ :: 1r.
' a...
T4
“Zia “.2“:~-' 'N
v.4. _'
.s‘kbgg‘. :\
;;--,. ~. ' ‘
‘I‘~V“ h \ p- '
... one .Cta 'l)‘
I
;~.' .
‘ ‘6
K.“ ha. ‘ .
‘ M..\ "0’; -. .-
a “'“¢w,
...: “~
-‘ ‘
U.,: E? v:
4 .3 c p .
‘ u~. ‘\A
s‘.
\

 

43-; ‘ ,M
v.‘ . ‘ .
' “J r- " “is .
‘ A4 in . I“
-="-.°. .
..V..Q. a:

no

 

 

 

45

order of Augustus. We Shall now consider in some detail the nature
of the official religion of Rome, and the Spreading international faiths,
with particular emphasis upon Judaism and Christianity.

Early forms of religion in the Italian peninsula were animistic
in nature. All natural forces and processes were viewed as the
eXpression of the activity of supernatural Spirits.

These Spirits were incalculable, impersonal, forces. The
Romans called them numina, and so we might use the term
"numinism" to describe Roman animism. When such numina
were thought of as personalities with definite names they
became ”gods", dei, and this stage of religious development is
called ”deism". —B-e-cause the primitive Roman gods were the
Spirits of an earlier age, for a long tMe the Romans worshipped
them without images or temples. But each divinity was regarded
as residing in a certain locality and only there could his worship
be conducted. The true Roman gods lacked human attributes:
their power was admitted but they inspired no personal devotion.
Consequently the Romans had no cosmogony or mythology of
their own and Roman theology consisted in the knowledge of
these deities and their powers and of the ceremonial acts
necessary to influence them. 1

The practical Romans viewed religion as a system of contractual
relations. The idea of loving their gods would never have occurred to
them for they worshipped, not in order. to be made good, but to be
made prOSperouS. Ritual, therefore, occupied a place of primary
importance, and success or failure in the projects of life was believed
to depend upon faithfulness in religious ritual. Sacrifice was the
essential of ritual, but usually it was the offering of fruits and grains,
rather than of blood.

It is in the cult of the household that we can beSt see the
true Roman religious ideas. The ‘chief divinities of the house-
hold were: Janus, the Spirit of the doorway; Vesta, the Spirit
of the fire on the hearth; the Penates, the guardian Spirits of
the store-chamber; the Lar Familiaris, which we may perhaps

 

lBoak, p. 71.

,- - ...
‘. ...: .- q~ ,v ;
.~...o- v- 5“" “

c -o-p- .0 ‘
, .---g.
:‘r’ahl' ‘ .*‘
...... a-od\o~lh~a I
. . on .'
_. . '- ....—
O‘h Li
...J-v. aha-cu ~ '4

P'.” , ..
.tat»--n:o‘ a an o
c Q n
... ca 0” h . .-
0 g .
...» Jo h.-C cl- ud- .. .a .

. . .
h-w;"’b-. —- "-2“ b .
~.i...-.'.¢ ...-o. Jt

. a
‘2‘. ... Op .-

--—~ -- ...: than:

.
‘ 0
~""" I .. n ‘
b 4' ... P—I .-
J:—. ‘_.‘ 3”_ ‘ ._
'1,_.' .
--‘ I-t: 0'- fi,. . .
d"“ ~ Moe kn...
w.
“J; --..-.’,; ‘ ...
~.. ' ~
v- .J“:“F’u" "

5.--.

..-
... ‘
:-“‘-;_.. .
”"Uoi . :"V‘." ,_
I ‘f‘t~t...: __ a
h u- ‘ v
\ 4 ‘ g. c
.'L s...Jt ,‘._- _ .
“‘~‘ .4
-..,

 

 

 

46

regard as the spirit of the cultivated land tranSplanted within
the house to be the guardian of the family fortune; and the
Genius or guardian spirit of the life of the family as a whole,
later associated with the head of the household as his Spiritual

' double. Besides these numina there were many others which
were considered to be in control of the manifold aspects of the
life of the household and its individual members including
birth, marriage, and death. Although the male head of the
household may be regarded as its priest, the worship of cer-
tain of the powers revered within the house was carried out
by his wife and daughters. 1

Besides the cult of the household, the public or state cult Should
also be considered. The calendar traditionally attributed to Numa
probably represents the first attempt to systematize the old religion,
and it can be dated about the time of the beginning of the Republic.

At this stage the state religion was that of an essentially agri-
cultural community and consisted mainly in the performance

of certain rites of the household and of the farm by or for the
pe0ple as a whole. The state cults of Vesta and the Penates,

as well as the festival of the Ambarvalia, the annual solemn
purification of the fields, were of this nature. But, in addition,
the state religion included the worship of a number of divinities
whose personalities and powers were conceived of with greater
distinctness than the numina venerated in the house and in the
fields. The chief place among these gods was held originally

by the triad Mars, Jupiter, and Quirinus, but by the time of

the dedication of the temple of Jupiter on the Capitoline Hill

(508 B. C.) these had given way to a new triad: Jupiter, Juno,
and Minerva. Jupiter Optimus Maximus, called also Capitolinus
from his place of worship, was originally a god of the sky, but
adorned with other attributes was finally revered as the chief
protecting divinity of the Roman state. Juno was the female
counterpart of Jupiter and was the great patron goddess of
women. Minerva, as we have seen, was the patroness of crafts-
men. Mars, originally a god of agriculture as well as of war,
became in the state cult of the Republic essentially the patron
deity of warlike, "martial, " activities and gave his name to the
military training ground of Rome, the Campus Martius or Field
of Mars. 7'

 

 

llbid., pp. 72-73.
21bid., pp. 73-76.

P— . ’ ‘ 0 "
-..~;- a \ v ...
no

.‘Haws‘ a.

__. - ...ol 4 '
.péc. . ,C . F. ,
04-. ‘44- ‘5 '5...‘ '

-
v
, I
...»~..- ' ".

- . ._ . _.

”a..n..-..-.,. .. ... .

.--....u...¢.Cn | ‘44L -v
.

... . .

p‘vo- 0...... . or.

"“°‘| ~.s....’.‘..C.\ be:
' I

.L..:¢e ‘3 .‘.,_’_ 2,... ...
5“. o¥.¢‘ann hora o

.
... ' s .

. ‘-...:.-.-_ ... _ - - F
..-‘ ,4 ...
.‘**‘¢ but .~o.g

I. . ’1 D
n- - -- _
‘1'.-. C ‘ - '0‘ .F.. " ‘
os‘v SEA; ‘4.» M. .

.. ~Q as;-
-- - “-n ...

N .. ‘ A F In

: E - a..- i. 9‘ o

‘ I

"i‘; ‘.
“"-' a.

o.

:“ -‘-‘ n“.

‘ a. c.:J D.
“a.“ 4‘ ~ -

b
0‘ m
‘

 

 

 

 

47

Through the state-worship, foreign religions first became
Significant in Italy. Someone has said that Rome was as anxious to
conquer gods as! cities, and it is certain that hOSpitality rather than
hostility was early offered to the gods of foreigners. Gods absorbed
through war were added to those of native Italy and those that had
been introduced by the Greek colonists of Southern Italy in the eighth
century. Ultimately the Romans set up the College of Pontifices to
regulate religion and ritual. The Pontifices were religious magistrates
who adjusted the calendar every year, and organized the festivals.

To them also fell the duty of deciding regarding the admission of
foreign gods and where new temples and their priests Should be estab-
lished. One important priestly college of: Rome was that of the augurs,
who were Specialists in interpreting omens and in divination.

It is also important to notice the influence of Greek mythology
upon Roman religion.

Rome was early brought into intercourse with the old Greek
cities of Southern Italy, which at length were incorporated under
her rule. In the time of the Tarquins, the Sibylline books,
which explained the rites pr0per to be practised in exigencies
not provided for by the ordinary ritual, were introduced from
Cumae. Also, the worship of Apollo was brought from this
oldest of the Greek settlements, and acquired a constantly
increasing influence until at length this Greek god, whose heal-
ing power was supposed to go forth upon the body and the Spirit,
received honors second only to those paid to Jupiter. In early
times, the Romans had resorted to the oracle at Delphi for
counsel; and after the capture of Veii, they sent there a votive
offering. Recognizing the Greeks as kinsmen, and identifying
the Hellenic divinities with their own, they incorporated into
their creed the myths and legends of the Greek mythology, and,
more and more, elements of the cultuS associated with them.
This fusion went on at a rapid pace in the two or three centuries
that immediately preceded the Christian era. 1

 

1Fisher, pp. 123- 124.

I .‘ ‘ r!
7 . ‘
" .64.: o .
”I .‘I‘
- ‘J.C...| ..a .
...... .

‘
..- :... ...- a”
' II'I udl ...‘. \-
-‘u..
.
. . . o
. . -. r-
.. I; ‘5' ‘O‘CCGI‘. "‘ .
in»... a“. U.-
.

. I -
""ar 0-} . ......”
‘_Jacn Ht‘ _\"‘ .~ .
.

L ' I ‘.
"'""“ .« .1.
g
0".‘OOQ lt..k. ..
h
o
’A 7 - , —
‘i'. F . " .. v.
.. a 44.1““. . ~

. v
tp-n..,_.‘ .P l -
Innkbod-tt' ‘.‘L L
. I
on-g‘a..__ ‘. .
...: dic:tl.\‘€ J. .

.

.‘_ - ‘

... .

‘P’ ‘,‘ .‘ q .
u~5-.} ¢c‘t;.l-.H

u h .
u‘.. ‘ .
Q h ‘ ._ -
choc hate ‘:1. I?“ ‘ ,
- “ou
.: .
\ u _
not- ‘ J. fin‘¢\ r. r. .
‘L. . ‘
~‘n._
‘ . I- I
JyoteJ.e ‘ctt‘ o
- ‘-
a .‘l' ..., .0... ‘
M . . _ ‘
AA.\ Aao bndt \zm
- ‘.
« I
r-‘h... . ‘ '
‘J ' "u . '
. u.“ a“: snag.
' \

‘\'

i. - ‘
at ‘Q h‘.‘.e -

“u \a.‘
a ‘t _.J9»

Vs

 

 

48

Undoubtedly many widely-travelled and philoSOphical Romans
had become sceptical concerning the popular religion by the time of
Augustus. But this Should not be construed as signifying that their
attitude had Spread to the greater number of the pe0p1e. Such was
not the case. Most of the pOpulace

. . . had at home, in their houses and in their fields, gods
whom they knew, invoked, feared, or loved. Between the in-
dividual religion of the thinkers and the official worship there
was a popular religion made up of the Simple fancies, the pious
traditions, the earnestness, and the emotion natural to man in
the presence of the unknown. It formed the deep stratum which,
even among the most highly cultivated, was always cr0pping up
at some point. On this p0pular religion Augustus based, at
least in part, his national restoration. 1

The form and the vitality of this religious sentiment are
chiefly revealed to us by the recent discovery at Delos of a
number of monuments of family worship belonging to the Roman
colony which settled in the island in the first half of the
Ist century B. C. These modest monuments agree, in general,
with the information supplied by many paintings from Pompeii,
most of which date only from the Ist century A. D. , and are
therefore later than the Augustan restoration. They thus form
a link in the chain which connects the religion of the Imperial
epoch with that of the early centuries of Rome, and, as such,
are of quite Special interest.2

The great influx of religious and philosophical ideas from the
East did not confuse the great majority of the Romans.

Beneath the brilliant but superficial facing of cosm0politan
intellectual life, beneath the more vulgar stratum of Graeco-
Oriental mysticism complicated by magic and astrology, we must
not forget the profound, vigorous life of the mass of the Italian
pe0p1e. History, being wholly aristocratic and political, hardly
noticed them. For they lived outside history, so to Speak, con-
tent to be alive under a sunny sky, on a land which they loved.
They needed no more than a few very simple ideas inherited from

 

lGrenier, The Roman Spirit, pp. 366-367.
21bid., p. 367.

 

' ,
Q - '
..'.'._.;’o‘o-c-. .:
0.9:... ail..-.“ .
.
. ' V.
fl. _. F ‘
v A
.....c ..-... v" '
.- u

I. .o< ’ ' ' '
‘_. "¢_P, . '
3...“... .0... ~00. \ u
, .. 0.- . - "
.. 'n r‘ ‘7 '1
a... .

50M~§"."'.
.

. .
.c .- .
. ..- :. ' ‘
.~.0‘.» .uccg oD' "
.. 1 c«
. . - -
o a" .pc '5' " .
-..-.. ha .‘.“°
5.
Q‘ 0 ' '-
b; --- O -O .n w. I
on» .‘o- J; u.--pv'»-
.
.u. ‘ '
, m- .o
.....5 7 d; "'3'" "
.1 IQI- Jo val‘O-~‘

-L- q
P - ‘A~- .- -
‘“‘ ¢\Jaaca: ’

“.93: I
.U‘
‘ 4‘51... I

‘.~ ‘;‘:-\.. "
J ._ .- ) .
. v.0... ‘(.. If'. ‘F 0
w
hhfld.
.
...
...
\‘n.,:_ I‘ l- 0
.I z. - o g
: ‘v'ds v L
.
u; - .
, n ‘A. ,
"“~’-:a:€ ...... ‘

 

 

 

49

their forefathers and a few homely rites to give them con-
fidence and joy. A loyal, courageous race, feeling no dread
in the presence of the unknown and, at bottom, not caring
much about it, when the thoughts and fancies of the
Mediterranean came pouring in they kept alive the original
conceptions and religious acts of the first masters of the
Italian soil. At the unextinguished fire: of their humble
altars the religion of Imperial Rome was rekindled.1

The cult of Emperor worship also had its beginnings in the first

century, but its prominence was reserved for a later period.

The Oriental Religions

 

The Roman conquests in the East had the result of reinforcing
the inroads that oriental cults had already made in Italy. They offered
men personal fellowship with personal deities, and gave promise of
immortality. Most of the influential cults were mystery religions
with elaborate rituals of initiation and worship which appealed to the
senses and to the emotions.

At first the Roman government was tolerant of the new beliefs
and interfered only when orgiastic practices interfered with Roman
conceptions of morality. During the last century of the Republic, the
Senate endeavoured to drive the cult of Isis from Rome, but in 42 B. C.
the triumvirs erected a temple to this goddess. Augustus banished
Isis worship, but by 70 A. D. it had become re-established in Rome.

First in time came the worship of the Great Mother of Pessinus,
also known as Cybele. Believed to be the source of all life in nature,
like Demeter, her rites correSpondingly were orgiastic in character.
Attis, her consort, personified the death and resurrection of nature

in winter and Spring. . The myth tells of his dying by self-multilation,

 

llbid. , pp. 271-272.

"-«v a V ‘
t

. .. , ...
.-P~ ’
u...

p.,: h“: .

‘-..
A-

--"‘V‘«‘.-

.\ ... '1. ‘v
uld.‘.c V.‘

Q
~,.
‘ h --
l&.~ Q.‘
.. . I
1
‘5‘. “"‘3 .

{5“ . ~.' ..._ ~
64:3 J. thtr., W
...
:55: 5 ~ .4 1
~a, “‘18 15‘: .
I»
‘ ‘
The 15;:C
sbtcaw-le a E.“
Q, . J‘I'
‘ Q
1.Jmt:1e \. L
‘L‘ I . -‘c .

T
c J: 86"
‘t1;\_i
“ “
.‘h ‘
‘52.-
It“ k“e h
Part
2;
«1‘1-

. gr,
‘0 ...!
r .

-|
0-,
‘ ....

 

 

50

and the goddess mourns until he is revived. On the basis of this
belief was established a ritual by which believers could also attain

to a similar victory over death. The cult was familiar to the Greeks
by the Sixth century B. C. , but it was not until 204 B. C. that the
wOrShip of Cybele was introduced into Italy. The occasion waS one of
crises during the conflict with Hannibal. After the sacred stone of
Pessinus was solemnly installed on the Palatine, the Romans achieved
victory over Carthage, and the position of Cybele seemed henceforth
secure. It was not, however, until the first century A. D. that her
worship really thrived in Rome. Other cults such as that of the
Babylonian Ishtar, the Phoenician Ashtart, and the Greek Aphrodite
duplicated many of the essential features of the Magna Mater worship.
Similar duplication is found in such parallels as the Greek counter-
parts of Isis, Osiris, and Horus, namely Demeter, Dionysus, and
Apollo.

ISiS and Osiris were the chief figures in the mysteries of Egypt.
Their myth is somewhat Similar to that of Cybele and Attis, involving
the story of death, mourning, and resurrection. Serapis, who is often
associated with Isis, may have been identical with Osiris.

. The Isiac worship had conquered the Greek world before
it became a power in Italy. In the fourth century B. C. traders
" from the Nile had their temple of Isis at the Peiraeus; in the
third century the worship had been admitted within the walls of
Athens. About the same time the goddess had found a home at
Ceos, and Delos, at Smyrna and Halicarnassus, and on the
coasts of Thrace. 1 ’ ’

For seven centuries from the time of its importation into Athens
the worship of Isis prospered in Europe. It probably arrived in Italy

through the ports of Campania and there are indications that a temple

 

lSamuel Dill, Roman Society from Nero to Marcus Aurelius
(London: Macmillan and Company, 1925), pp. 560-561.

51

of Serapis existed at Puteoli as early as 150 B. C. Similarly, the
temple of Isis destroyed in the earthquake of 63 A. D. was established
about the beginning of the first century B. C.

The cult of Isis had indeed very various attractions for dif-
ferent minds. But for the masses, Slaves, freedmen, and
poor working pe0p1e, its great fascination lay in the pomp of
its ritual, and the passionate emotion aroused by the mourning
for the dead Osiris, and his joyful restoration. It is this
asPect of the worship which is assailed and ridiculed by the
Christian apologists of the reign of Alexander Severus and of
the reign of Constantine. The goddess, one of whose special
functions was the care of mothers in childbirth, appealed
eSpecially to female sensibility. As in the cult of Magna Mater,
women had a prominent place in her services and processions,
and records of these sacred dignities appear on the monuments
of great Roman ladies down to the end of the Western Empire.
The history of a great religious movement in conflict with a
reactionary conservatism, of cosmopolitan feeling arrayed
against old Roman sentiment. 1

The Oriental cult destined to become the most important was
that of Mithraism. This religion had an Iranian origin. Mithra, in
Zoroastrian theology, was the agent of the god of light against the god
of darkness. As a result of Babylonian and Greek influence, Mithra
later was identified with the Sun- god. Dill says of Mithraism that:

It is perhaps the highest and most striking example of the last
efforts of paganism to reconcile itself to the great moral and
spiritual movement which was setting steadily, and with growing
momentum, towards purer conceptions of God, of man's relations
to Him, and of the life to come. It is also the greatest effort of
syncretism to absorb, without extinguishing, the gods of the
classic pantheon in a cult which was almost monotheistic, to
transform old forms of nature worship and cosmic symbolism
into a system which should provide at once some form of moral
discipline and real satisfaction for Spiritual wants. 2

 

‘Ibid., pp. 564-565.
zlbid., p. 585.

52

By the end of the first century A. D. Mithraism had become
influential in Rome. Mithra was known as the god of battles and thus
became a patron deity of the legions. It is impossible to ascertain
the exact time when this cult was introduced into Italy but a passage
from Plutarch's life of Pompey indicates its existence in the West in
70 B. C. Not until the second and third centuries, however, did
Mithraism become a serious rival of Christianity. At that time
"Mithra, the Unconquered, the god of many lands, and dynasties from
the dawn of history was a fascinating power. But, at his best, he

belonged to the order which was vanishing. "1 ’

Such, in broad outlines, were the redemption-religions
of the Graeco-Roman world. In details they exhibit varying
characteristics, but they all alike seek to meet the widespread
demand for an individual salvation to be procured primarily by
the aid of the deity. The demand for this type of religion was
particularly strong in Hellenistic times, when national ideals
were disappearing and the individual was thrown more Specific-
ally upon his own resources in a vast and varied world. The
human spirit, conscious of its frailty and helpless at the loss
of older sanctions, eagerly turned toward those cults which
offered a personal salvation based upon a divine redemptive
transaction. Among the oriental religions of redemption
which attempted to meet this Situation, Christianity was the
last to arise, but it ultimately triumphed over all its rivals. 7'

Ancient tradition suggests that even the Druid worship which
penetrated the western lands of Britain, Gaul, Spain, etc. , had its
origin in the Orient. Characteristic of the Druids was the practice of
nature worship and the belief in’the transmigration of souls.

The very popularity of these Oriental mystery religions among
the Romans reveals the soul-hunger of the times. The State religion

with its formalism and remoteness supplied little for the emotions or

 

1Ibid., p. 626.
zCase, p. 330.

 

. . u

.. wn-n’ ' m y- r- .r‘ °

......J..;.-.‘: 3. Laaeado H 0‘;-
.. ..

7 ; - ,
'5.5 D.’ 3‘:
O

I Q
as Wt of .

...—SJ 5“.

....J ...1.. F‘ o . . .

-:n-:T‘.~b: ‘2E“ ‘41: Sert'- .
a u

32' ie

...-...}

Q .7
, . ..., . p-o '
5‘- ... ....
. .1, a... C.::c..:.: '.
.
-... .. ,,
\\ "‘.""“‘l ' v
I. ‘ ..
“ pun. “~‘“D.e:d-‘pl‘ ....
‘ ‘~ 'g ‘ I
H‘-
-.

“"o~~ '
I'. “ n 0
" ":;C:\e

..

V
h _ .
- we ftufllf‘.t.~:

s..~.

~;-~ D: accented

 

.‘v~0

A; g
ba. -L (6".H u‘.
"\u. ‘

5112‘1'5 ‘ time t
v e.

. ,_ ‘5 0f YEELI-g :_
ttsldh ‘ ‘ Jr:-

V»

0 d (Dire?
34;: em ‘ r
3:.- ‘ ple “Oh“ ‘ ‘-
':.re a a:

°‘ a‘1 x...”

“"35 :I; “‘02:."

53

deep longings of men. Even the protest of Augustus against such
worship as that of Isis proved ineffectual, and steadily most of the
mystery cults grew in strength. To consider the common features

of most of the cults, emotional appeal and preoccupation with the

fate of the soul etc. , is to become aware of the Spirit of stultification,
uncertainty, and dissatisfaction which prevailed in the Empire. It was
this Spirit which presaged the Shattering of the classical dream, and
which suggested the readiness with which a religion such as Christianity

might be accepted.

Judaism

When the first century is considered from the viewpoint of our
own age, possibly neither the Greek or the Roman was the most
important racial type of his day. The ubiquitous Jew has overshadowed
them both in terms of influence. From this despised race came the
primary elements and the progenitors of Christianity.

Strict monotheists, and posses sors of a revelation and a history
they believed to be supernatural, the Jews did not Share the syncretis-
tic tendencies of their neighbours. Instead, they Shared with a hungry
world their own belief in a coming Messiah. In the days of Augustus
Caesar, synagogue scholars in every part of the world were pointing
to the pr0phecies of their sacred Scriptures and declaring it was time
for the promised Sun of Righteousness to dawn upon the world. Had not
the ninth chapter of Daniel the prOphet foretold that at the close of the
seventy weeks of years from the rebuilding of the Temple (457 B. C.)
the Messiah would come? Had not Haggai foretold that the glory of
the rebuilt Temple would be greater than that of Solomon's because

the "Desire of all Nations" would stand within its precincts? So the

scribes affirmed.

 

v c- ' ' ‘ _ _"
g d; giqu "‘C O
“...-5.5... AI. 0.,

1'235123..J'3".I‘.Z .SE 3.}.

4 , v
rqI-.---q .g- —,-.,.
«uh-ant: ... Mac sec J.c\4 (.
.

“: «: .... r: .1. fa

, __' ‘ . '

.-. .7. .... 3.. .“c ':C 2:
' U

I II I
‘ c.’. to "v-I
nIJ‘»..J.-:. C‘IF
- Q
v..
N‘ .
~. :3 Pena"
I O J".OJ.‘ a,” .1"
‘ - I. “.9
u
.h‘“: I.‘

f'I

..‘ler
Llas
Se
q. . -\a‘
“if
\I
1"; . .
“\- r ‘
D‘aSDOr-
' Q d I ‘h
“l.‘ k‘.

I
4

54

In Palestine itself, independence from Greek rule had been
secured following the Maccabean rebellion against Antiochus
Epiphanes in the second century B. C. By 60 B. C. , however, the
country was under Roman control. Herod Antipater was the first
of a line of kings which was to govern parts of Palestine for over a
century. After a rebellion in A.D. 6 against Archelaeus, one of the
sons of Herod the Great, Judea and Samaria were henceforth governed
by a Roman procurator whose headquarters were at Caesarea.

Never did the Jews of Palestine take kindly to Roman rule.

The Zealot party represented most strongly the Jewish hatred for the
foreign overlords. Constantly these rabid nationalists endeavoured to
stir up rebellion, and they were not without some success in such
projects. The climax came in A.D. 70, when the Temple was des-
troyed by Titus during the Siege of Jerusalem.

Other influential Jewish parties included the Pharisees, the
Sadducees, and the Essenes. The last-named was an ascetic sect
which lived in small monastic communities. Representative of these
was the group who dwelled at the northwest Shore of the Dead Sea and
whose library was discovered in 1947. The Pharisees were the con-
servative interpreters of the Torah and reSponsible for the line of
Rabbis who produced the Midrash and the Talmud. Next in importance
to these religious leaders of Israel were the aristocratic Sadducees,
who possessed the priestly offices. While the Pharisees found their
following among the village peasants, the Sadducees claimed the
wealthier classes. Naturally, the two parties constantly vied with one
another.

The Dia8pora which resulted in the far-flung synagogue system
began in the eighth century B. C. , when Assyrian armies transported

multitudes of Jews to the far East. Other migrations followed in the

55

third and second centuries B. C. During the former many moved to
Alexandria, and during the latter large numbers settled northward
around Antioch and in Cilicia. In 63 B. C. Pompey brought back to
Rome a host of Jewish captives. Adventurous Jewish colonists

Spread to every part of the Empire, and in our day the existence of
over one hundred and fifty such communities has been traced. These
colonies never lost their allegiance to Jerusalem and all for which

the city stood, and even in foreign lands they successfully proselytized.
Josephus could, boast that:

Among the masses there has long been much zeal for our
religion; nor is there any city, Greek or barbarian, nor a Single
nation where the custom of our seventh day of rest from labour
has not come into vogue; and the fasts and the lamp-lightnings
and many of our prohibitions regarding food are observed. 1

The philosopher Seneca complained that: "So far has the usage of the
accursed race prevailed that it is now received throughout all lands;
the conquered have given laws to the conquerors. ..2

Nevertheless, the Jews themselves in many areas had been
greatly influenced by Hellenistic culture but ”whatever the Jews took
over from the Greeks was in form only, not in essence. "3 It was at
Alexandria that the Jews came the closest to merging with surrounding
cultures. Here an unorthodox type of Jewish theology arose which was
a curious blend of the Old Testament with Platonic philosophy. Philo,
born about 20 B. C. , was the principal exponent of this School. DeSpite
this compromise in thought, the Jews in other ways stubbornly affirmed

their own distinctness, and at Alexandria as elsewhere they proved a

 

lContra Apion II 39. Cited by David Smith, The Life and Letters
of St. Paul (New York: Harper [n.d.]), p. 6.

 

 

2Cited by Augustine in 123 Civitas Dei vi. 11.

 

3W. O. E. Oesterley and T. H. Robinson, A History of Israel
(Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1951), p. 402.

 

 

‘ I
‘ . .
‘ -.n- -9 a ‘
.‘n -v 0I- ‘ . t " t
x. J. g-
-.-... ...C .. ,
. .. . . . ‘ ...
.... ”.... - .-’;D‘."'
_: JtnAbcac .05..“ ‘Oficcl

2, ... .L . F... ,
;:_::2 Janet“ ...c ... t.

,
’"m"
o.)

W ‘zepa; -.

‘— ..
..."... u
4. .. .
F --‘A-.\: r,-
I I O Lace-cu. K4..-

. I, ‘

.' 'F‘vv '. Q’. .
, >- :

H buyout a. 6. Inc

\
- I
cm" at ’~: -...
I‘J."‘ undue“. ‘
a
.

".:~’ a: .‘ . . -
“Wu J. LL: .' c2; .-

.. . _ .
. I I 3‘. brad: t:: .I\
6'1 ‘v ' '

‘I‘

.-
«.lth, % D-,:‘L

t 656 r.£:::
L . '
S-alD 'ae :‘\e ‘ I ‘.O
ea y
no
3“" 0:6 3? m - g.
A. .

 

 

 

56

thorn in the side of governing officials, as well as being obnoxious
to the Gentile inhabitants of the area. Time and again there were
clashes between the Greeks and Jews at Alexandria, reaching a
climax in the pogrom of the days of Caligula.

. . . Claudius charges the Alexandrians to 'offer no outrage

to them [i. e. the Jews] in the exercise of their traditional
worship, but to permit them to observe their customs as in the
time of Divus Augustus, which customs I also, after hearing
both sides, have confirmed.‘ In one of the two edicts of Claudius,
quoted by Josephus, it is said; 'I will, therefore, that the
nation of the Jews be not deprived of their rights and privileges
. . . but that those rights and privileges, which they formerly
enjoyed, be preserved to them, and that they may continue in
their own customs.‘ In the other edict these rights and privi-
leges are accorded to all Jews throughout the Roman empire.
That these rights and privileges did not include those of citizen-
ship we have already seen, and the letter of Claudius bears this
out. One of most important point for the Jews resulted from
this; their synagogues were not desecrated by statues of the
emperor, which had been the initial cause of the trouble. 1

As for the Jewish community at Rome,

the first time that anything in the nature of a persecution
of the Jews took place Was in the reign of Tiberius. This was
owing to the action of an imposter, a renegade Jew, who had
been driven out of his own country for some crime, and had come
to Rome posing as a teacher of wisdom; he, with the help of
three other rogues, persuaded a noble lady, named Fulvia, a
convert to Judaism, to make a gift of gold and purple to the
Temple at Jerusalem; but having got hold of these gifts the four
thieves kept them. When this came to the ears of Tiberius he
ordered all Jews to be banished from Rome. According to Philo,
the banishment was really due to Sejanus, a high Roman official;
on his death, Tiberius ordered that all the Jews, -where-soever
residing, were to be permitted full enjoyment of religious free-
dom; though he does not say anything about allowing the Jews to
return to Rome, he evidently intended that this should be so, as,
not very long after, a Jewish community is implicitly stated to
have been in Rome again; for Claudius, at the beginning of his
reign, put forth an edict confirming all the rights and privileges

 

‘Ibid., Vol. II, p. 403.

 

 

. .
I
--..- ,5. A
:5 :o ‘.Jn Jso‘\ Ado
' o A . p . \r
O...- ..., A
.:t.CA: J. $..
' o
0-" ... H - -, ‘-v‘
o“)oo. .4 Cak\)u...
I ‘ '
:‘gv '- v— 0". 't.
clot»- u 4.4 5..» g .

:v'w-3*w-e --~¢-~—
...... .\J... . Guca.
.

a ‘ .
\..;t-....:
duvquo‘n.
... . .
‘00 . .
p'v * . h
Aunt out LAUdJ..\-.-

'tl ' 5 Q
- ":‘fiv'O - . u '
.--b..“‘lJ ’g .‘
u l ...} 3‘ “‘3‘ -Ix
5
I
In 4""- vv- .
F 0
e .

..

. :nrc -r- - - ' '

.' “ _ v 4 0a -

. ..-)»c-.ncfi.:t
1;“ ;n-..,o.‘. ' F
"..-.JNJ: 3i-"' "

‘ . v.1LK

 

\ ‘,po ‘)
‘\:;3 E). 4

57

of the Jews throughout the empire, 'and this grant I make', he
says, 'not only for the sake of the petitioners, but as judging
those Jews for whom I have been petitioned worthy of such a
favour, on account of their fidelity and friendship to the Romans' .
Later on in the reign of Claudius the Jews were again banished
' from Rome, according to Acts xviii. 2; this is also mentioned by
Suetonius . 1

That the trouble-makers at Alexandria and Rome were not en-
tirely representative is indicated by the fact that in the East the
great majority of the Jews of the DiSpersion led quiet and lawn-abiding
lives.2 However, it was also in the area of Asia Minor that some of
the Jews showed themselves different from those of other areas by
their adoption of Graeco-Oriental cults.

But things like this were aberrations and not typical of the Jews
of the DiSpersion in general; the great mass, wherever settled,
loyally adhered to the ancestral religion; as Tarn says, apart
from the cults just mentioned, 'anything Jews took from Hellen-
ism was only outward form; few learned anything of its Spirit.
Whether a Jew adopted or rejected Greek forms he remained a
Jew, a man whose ideals were not those of the Greek, even if
expressed in the same word. '3

The synagogues which had Sprung up during and after the Exile
were everywhere the centers of Jewish instruction and worship.
Every town of the Roman empire of any considerable size contained a
synagogue. These were managed by "elders, " and every sabbath day
witnessed the gathering together of all faithful Jews for prayer and
study of the Torah. Despite the hatred excited by their exclusiveness,
the Jews made many proselytes from among the Gentiles, as witnessed
to by non-Jewish writers. These they instructed in their Law and in
their hope of a soon-coming Messiah who they believed would throw

off the Roman yoke and give victory and rest to Israel.

 

lIbid., p. 414..
21bid., p. 421.
31bid., p. 424.

 

I: €22.15 be remen: Dz

. . ‘.. 0"- '
.... V' ,{ ...
::.aA¢’ A.-\e 54.x . g

A.-

Iclif. 31:13 DT.-C.c...'?‘.
.

u- - v"~ O. - h
.41., ~£t?€\c.' ..".L"» -

. . , .
""““‘H“ 0. . ..

F I A V "
Khan-hon». L..C.a canto?
.

‘r
hu‘

.I . . . -.I
£1: up.st.»1:c or): t"
a:::: 1116 Greek; "

3:. 'I “3--" ‘
.‘L .....lft.1 DC. ”1‘...
1..
4. \ f: -. . _ .
uh... ‘ 5“: are” L ‘
‘ ~n :1.
:Etk: a: \‘m H ~ ~ V
v t.. d: n.s ks'z‘,‘
I...“- .
.‘uu ,H-O.
‘ ‘-
Ih ;: “at ‘*..‘ .
okcn‘gl‘u‘ (I:
"H
A l
4:“: 3o C“ f.
N ‘ N P - -
e U“-‘-CLQ.D
‘\4..
‘u .
"... . . n
u U. tne cn“:.;‘
4
“mar. Zn
‘1 ‘ V
.f‘l‘u.
‘w\er

‘K.a\. .

58

It should be remembered that the Dispersion of the Jews greatly
facilitated the diffusion of Christianity.

The heralds of the GOSpel were themselves Jews, and their
mission, like their Lord's was not to overthrow the ancient
faith but to proclaim its fulfilment. It was no small advantage
that, wherever they went, they found an audience which could
understand their message; and in every town which they visited,
they repaired immediately to the Jewish synagogue, and there
preached the glad tidings. The GosPel was indeed a message
of universal grace, but the providence of God had prescribed
the apostolic procedure--'both to the Jew, in the first instance,
_ and to the Greek. '1

Paul hiInself belonged to the Dispersion, and his birthplace and
early training prepared him for the task of persuading Romans and

Greeks as well as his own countrymen.

Christianity

 

It is not without cause that some historians have seen in many
phases of the Graeco-Roman world a providential preparation for the

Spread of the Christian gospel. The Pax Romana, the ease of travel,

 

the universal use of a common language (Koiné Greek), the stress on
individuality which caused men and women to become more concerned
regarding their eternal destinies, the wide-Spread diSpersion of the
Jews and their sacred Scriptures, the gradual unveiling of the fatal
flaws of Classicism--all these, and other elements of life in the first
century, paved the way for the acceptance of a gOSpel whose idealistic
monotheism surpassedanything known before.

The New Testament enshrines for us a revelation of early Christian
preaching. One of its most striking features is the elevation of virtues

which were not p0pular in that age, virtues such as humility and

 

lDavid Smith, Life and Letters of St. Paul, p. 7.

.

a i a. - V't.‘
... o ‘H :c* a
331:.(‘3‘ bu
...»

- ;O\' '
1 -o.'- ‘
- ... P~-~.~Ha....\
i-i‘nd ;. VAAC “' l
.,.o' ‘
.
-
. . ' H i";
A.
:u"c: ‘ 3Q:C“ ‘
.i
..«M'

. . - ‘. .. t
~On- ounc‘ nr': 7‘ , 4" H
“...: aqhét “C; "J‘ ‘
t1-. : ,. 2. c. .4
.13.. 3. 2.53.5 ~o5~~
V
p .
«~04 ‘ F
:I‘A‘v o - “. ~ ‘
--:4 5‘ 3‘ :Ddlokubov 0.
l on
~ " v‘ A . ‘,
.«vp-a . oh- ‘F 0 .v‘
«~:CA. Mg: )J-4 3. .l. ..
fi‘:C’-".~:“W~I‘Q‘ ._
V""" ‘HCL ‘0‘: ..A.:s. ..
.. _ ‘ . .
'-"“ «r y- a... n,._
“-‘u 3- f-Cu 9.3.x...
‘O - V.
n F ...—Q. ‘_ .‘V’
“...; C\\C.J. :4“; ‘J\:
' y .
2.413.“ . ,
. ‘~ 6-— -
“‘ - ...: Hunt.
..j ‘ ‘ ~
. «. .‘, ‘ ‘ .
~ I" h“. ‘b~ ,‘
‘.J‘€bJ“‘ LQQL Scat :3.
'A
.". ... "1‘ ~ .
‘Ju W. F ,—- F
DKM De D‘CQ\..
‘

{:3

B¢¢e

 

59

meekness. These were strange and new to paganism. Nevertheless,
the center of the new religion was not a set of ideals or a creed but

a Person. Christianity was different from all preceding systems of
belief in that it based salvation, not upon the observance of outward
rituals or the performance of prescribed good works, but rather upon
relationship to a Person. Faith in Jesus Christ was the ”one thing
needful. " True, the faith if genuine would result in beneficient works,
but the fruit was not to be confused with the root.

Also of great significance is the claim of Christianity to uni-
versality of application. The Jewish Rabbi of Galilee had called
Himself "the Son of Man" rather than ”the Son of Abraham“ in order to
stress that His mission was for all men, not merely for the Jews.

He had spoken about the many who would come from the east and the
west to accept His gospel (Mt.8: 11), while His own race would reject
both Him and His teachings (Mt. 21:33-43). With great assurance He
had foretold that the day would come when His gosPel of the kingdom

of God would be preached throughout all the world as a witness to all
nations (Mt. 24:14). When a prostitute in repentance anointed His head
with oil, the Rabbi had declared that the story of that occurrence would
be told throughout the coming ages beyond the rise and fall of mighty
empires (Mt. 26:13). He seemed ever assured that against the universal
fellowship of believers He was establishing, the gates of death and the
grave would never prevail (Mt. 16: 18), deSpite schisms, apostasies,
and persecutions (Mt. 13:24-30; 7:22, 23; 24:9-12).

The first disciples, however, did not have the same world
vision. The early Church began at Jerusalem, and may have remained
there, but for the Jewish persecution described in Acts which scattered

the believers. l The book of Acts is a chronicle of some of the missionary

 

‘Acts 8: 1.

60

activity of Christ's followers, but it is also a record of the initial
reluctance of Jewish Christians to share their new treasure with the
Gentiles. Yet the introductory words in Acts of the Apostles assert
that the risen Christ had given a program of world-wide evangelization.
”Ye shall receive power . . . and ye shall be witnesses unto me both

in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, . and in Samaria, and unto the utter-

 

most part of the earth. " 1 Acts 1:8. The remainder of this chronicle

 

of Luke's describes the progress of the GosPel in the areas and in
the order named in this verse. The record of apostolic preaching
begins with a proclamation of Christ in the capital city of Judaism, and
it closes with the Apostle to the Gentiles proclaiming the same faith
in Rome, the capital of the world.

Early Christians had not only a common faith. In some instances
they shared a common treasury. Most important of all, they shared
a love for all men, even their persecutors. They were a new genre
on earth. Undoubtedly there were failures and backslidings, but the
dynamic influence of this ethic upon believing Jews and Gentiles was
undeniable. The new faith did not appeal merely to the uneducated,
and we find Paul boasting of converts even in the palace of the Caesars.
Men reared in the wisdom of the Greeks found in Christianity a more
sublime phiIOSOphy.

Second only to Christ Himself, stands the person of Paul. He it
was who began the evangelization of the West after his own astonish-

ing volts-face. From his glowing pen came discourses, intended to be

 

 

read aloud in local churches, which along with the Old Testament
Scriptures and other writings of the apostles, became the sacred books
of the new faith.

How was this new religion viewed by the leaders of the Empire?

 

1Unless otherwise stated, all texts are cited from the King
James Version of the Bible.

 

,,

. '- R , .90-
- . x"- .
"I, "VC nJ...C.1 vac-V

"__-. ...-U0

—. -n

...... -.-- \ 0"- o
‘ :..:. 2J'\C...."..C...
C U

,. .
a .c , .
-.~: .:- \. a.- c (1. ~ ~
—Auh.u.h~ Ce “4; ..-‘. .
l

I ' 'I I '1
"\I‘I ~ og- ...a q - -
...J;J.\ ed: “a :I 5 J2: .1

o

iffil‘ New in 60 A. '7

n v
I. .
‘Atpq .
”' 'vn.

5~gam_-..

- V
' fl‘a mu-.. .
. _ A
"‘ Ody taluxt4 galth s- I‘ '-
‘S
\.

a
a
m-.. ,.
3A ‘IAG.. GT.

4-: Cféature Of “L”- .-

 

’U
4*

(I!

“U
5‘.
(J'

 

 

61

At the first, Roman officials considered Christianity as merely a
Jewish sect; and consequently it attracted little Special attention from
the imperial government. Only when the Jews in city after city began
to persecute the followers of "the way" was it manifested that
Christianity was distinct from the older form of monotheism.
Probably the first Roman persecution of the followers of Christ was
that by Nero in 60 A.D.

It should be noticed that while some parallels between Christian-
ity and classical thought have often been noticed, there were differences
that are much more significant. Particularly is this true in the matters
of the nature of man and of history. Humanistic Classicism saw in
man a creature of reason who by the proper exercise of his powers
could create a Utopia. But Christianity viewed man as a fallen being
whose character was perverted as a result of original Sin.

The doctrine of sin and grace marks, in its most acute form,
the breach between Classicism and Christianity. It had been
the considered judgement of Aristotle that 'virtue and vice
are both alike in our own power'. 1

For Christians "the classical ideal of perfectability through

knowledge or enlightenment was wholly illusory. "2

For if there was any single thing to which Christian teaching
pointed, it was to a recognition of the authority of the Master
as the one avenue to truth. This authority was conceived as
absolute and exclusive. As such, it involved consequences of
the most far-reaching chara'cter, the full significance of which
was certainly not apparent, at any rate during the ante-Nicene
period. But this much, at least, was evident, that it meant a
departure from what, as we have elsewhere tried to Show, was
the conventional classical approach to the problems of human
life, that is, through 'nature and reason'. At the same time

 

lCochrane, p. 451.
2Cochrane, p. 452.

 

 

lb ~u~~""/‘ ‘
1,:._;c:.c- a ..t:
a»
u: 1 .q -
“i|”"‘3‘ '- ~. u'r
ck~:‘C\- \garJ.a...

‘ l .
" ‘r‘n u‘-9'h
L. .3... ahAA‘

“-6. ' _,
4‘ 54: \olum“ L1.
"2"« ,:.'-- '
“a: 3.1 “::3C~-o
.-.

n
‘5‘.-
.J.I:‘?";.v .
o...~. ‘ “~—
~ .‘ ‘ ‘n.
o
q.
‘1ch ‘ “a .
. ‘ -\.J:§ ‘. vs~
I t
u
F‘C\ 4"“
4
\v-sJ“..‘
.

'-
6""-

. r4 \-

.fi‘.

62 \

it suggested a new ideal and a new method of thought to be
achieved through 'dependence' on Christ. 1

To begin with, B'Christianity] affirmed that the historical
Christ was the 'only Son' of the Father and so, quite literally,
the God to end gods. It thus underlay what was commonly
regarded as 'Christian atheism'. For to accept this thesis was
to reject as fraudulent the multifarious deities of secularism
and, in particular, the claim to divinity put forward on behalf
of the 'virtue' and 'fortune' of Caesar. At the same time it
was to dissociate oneself from the hopes and fears embodied in
theAugustan empire. It thus accounts for that sense of aliena-
tion which led the Christian to describe himself as a pilgrim or
foreigner in imperial society, and for his absolute refusal to
participate in many of its most significant activities. It also
explains why he found himself denied the easy toleration which
was normally accorded to ‘unlicensed cultS'. 2

Similarly, the Christian view of time was different from that of
the Roman or Greek. He did not believe in endless cycles, but instead
he asserted that time was moving towards a definite objective which he
called ”the kingdom of God. " Providence, not the gods of chance, was
directing in the affairs of history. After all, had not the New Testament
promised in over three hundred places that Christ would return in glory?

Thus envisaged, human history emerges as indeed a 'conflict

of opposites', but the elements of opposition are not what Classic-
ism had supposed. For they constitute no reflection of contend-
ing physical forces, in the clash of which mankind plays a

dubious and uncertain role as the 'Subjective factor of an objective
process' . Nor do they mark a revulsion of man from nature, the
subject from its object, a conflict for the realization of material
or ideal, i. e. merely human and subjective, goods which recede
forever from the grasp. PrOperly understood, history is the

, record of a struggle, not for the realization of material or ideal
values but for the materialization, embodiment, the registration
in consciousness of real values, the values of truth, beauty, and
goodness which are thus so to Speak thrust upon it as the very
condition of its life and being. In these terms and in these terms

 

lIbid., p. 224.
zlbid., p. 225.

p. I
,U. ..¢ .. "I" .— V‘ -
G ‘- 0:8...tu’ n'.‘ v
. . g . . .
9"“; . rh":."4r‘.'
.443. .u V.A.a~sob....
' ¢ ‘
u o. ‘ .5. ' -.. r‘ ._
...... tu¢e ths * ‘ufiou‘ :
.-

._.._.‘.._..' - . -‘: ‘
...l..3?‘.c?\ IC..£Z;='
.

'.. a.

. . ‘

""- n- ' .

. V‘ ”-0 ....

~~4451t "‘ N n~
..mhc.l\e'u ...

\r-

.\

.V-j‘

~—~. -

 

 

63

alone can the secular effort of the human Spirit be exPlained
and justified, for only thus does it become intelligible.l

Thus in Christianity we trace the emergence of concepts which
in all future ages would significantly shape the thinking of mankind.
It seems impossible to understand Western culture, or to follow the
thread of mediaeval and modern history, without recognizing in this
revolutionary religion of lowly origin the most potent of all forces

which have influenced mankind.

Morals of Graeco-Roman Society

In every age you will find the two sorts of men, those who are
sure that they are the heirs of all the ages in the foremost
files of time, and those who are convinced that we are going
to the dogs. In every historical period two other historical
periods exist, the primal Golden Age forever Vanished, and
the blessed Millennium towards which we tend. 2

Our concept of the morals of a particular society will influence
our. evaluation of that society. However, as pointed out in the preced-
ing quotation, it is well-nigh impossible to deve10p a truly impartial
view of any age; and furthermore, it is absolutely impossible for any
man's summary to please all reviewers.

Beyond all doubt the moral conditions of the early Roman Empire
have been both grossly exaggerated in some cases and greatly under-
stated in others. In Rome's worst days there were men and women
reflecting probity and virtue. Innumerable families were bound
together by chaste affections, and the histories of the time are not with-
out examples of courage and altruism. AS one reviews the writings of

men like Cicero, Seneca, Pliny, and Marcus Aurelius, it is obvious

 

lIbid. , p. 513.

zEdward Kennard Rand, The Building of Eternal Rome (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1943), p. 178.

 

"*iaahers reis.

. ..

.. o-fih

,1“: va~
l

. o I v ,
...-- --tqu ‘ehafl 0* 0;...
‘.y.- :uyIaJCsoabl hale evuoo-

.

u o a.
run ".yfirv' O'O‘Q ,.
~ . -.16 c e
-.. oto‘nv'b “‘9‘ .4 g

' ' n i .
. o 9 o . _‘ . ..
.‘1 ...—1'. . 53 t“. 3. . - -

LEVJE :uatatzsn.
. .

 

64

that the philosophers reflected, in their discourses at least, tenets
which approached the ethics of Christianity, and these could not have
been without influence.

A hint of the two-fold aSpect of Roman life is indicated in the
following quotation.

Roman luxury did go to extreme lengths sometimes, and
Suetonius, as well as the satirists, loved to give elaborate
accounts of it. It is he who tells us of the flamingos' tongues,
mackerel livers, pheasant and peacock brains, and lampreys
which Vitellius caused to be collected by his fleet for a banquet.
But over against Vitellius can be set the moderate and
abstemious Vespasian, who after all proved to be a truer Roman.
The elder Pliny disliked all forms of excess, and tells us with
a shake of the head that ”Clodius the son of AeSOp the tragedian,
having been left by him very well off . . . used to give each of
his guests a dissolved pearl to drink, " a very unlikely piece of
gossip. These, and POppaea the Empress travelling with a
herd of asses large enough to assure her of a daily milk bath,
are the kind of stories which have led to the wideSpread opinion
that the Romans were extreme hedonists. 1

While Waddy thus protests against the overdrawing of the picture
of Roman morals, he also says:

The minds of the Empire Romans, as Shown in their
literature, were unimpressive. There was also a failure of
Spiritual power which was just as telling. The religion and
morality of the Empire makes a Sad study. There is not indeed
so abrupt a deterioration to record as in the field of literature;
for whereas Roman literature had a great age from which to
decline, Roman religion in the later days of the Republic was
already losing its integrity. But under the Empire we find a
steady crutnbling of nerve and will, which was a great factor
in the Romans' inability to survive. Half-hearted remedies,

from time to time applied, never looked like checking the decline. 2

. . . Rome's self appointed mission was to make the world
decent and comfortable. Her citizens were unblushing material-
ists, and their concentration on mere tangible things was an
overemphasis which cost them their survival.3

 

lWaddy, p. 174.
2lbid., pp. 215-216.
31bid., p. 169.

‘H

. ~

65

Despite these words from Waddy, it is not true to assert that
all Romans were materialistic. As shown elsewhere, many citizens
cherished religious and phiIOSOphical ideals which led them to look
beyond the'things of sight and touch. Nevertheless, the above
generalization from Waddy is substantially correct and is repeated
by many historians of the age. This prevailing attitude inevitably
led to what adherents to the Christian ethic would consider as
demoralization.

To see the world in its worst estate we turn to the age of
the satirists and of Tacitus, when all the different streams of
evil, coming from east, west, north, south, the vices of
barbarism and the vices of civilization, remnants of ancient
cults, and the latest refinements of luxury and impurity, met
and mingled on the banks of the Tiber. 1

Most races have always c0pied their gods, and the deities of the
Pantheon had set examples somewhat less than lofty. Thus Plato could
say about the stories in Homer: "They are likely to have a bad effect
on those who hear them; for everybody will begin to excuse his own
vices when he is convinced that similar wickednesses are always being
perpetrated by the kindreds of the gods. "7‘

”Neither Purity nor Humanity nor Mercy has a seat at
the Olympian board. Often had Zeus fallen a victim to Aphrodite.
So in reprisal (Homeric Hymn to Aphrodite) he fills her with a
passion for the comely mortal youth Anchises. In all these
epics the avowal of concupiscence is made with absolute frank-
ness, as by the suitors of PenelOpe, or as between Odysseus,
Kirke, Kalypso. "3

 

Next to the gods, the philos0phers may be considered the most

influential in the matter of ethics. In Rome, the philosophy of

 

1.‘Iowett, Epistles of St. Paul, p. 75, cited by Fisher, Beginnings,
p. 195.

2Fisher, Beginnings, p. 195.

 

 

 

3Ernest G. Sihler, cited by Wilbur Smith, Therefore Stand,
p. 236.

 

a..- -. z .- ...
‘..-...Ic.-.fl.$?‘.’l “v.5 226.6 *

s . . r. .
o A , a. Q v -
.

o 1 w 9 v
315:5 1:6 Cisse 0: tie :-

. y I l \
O —- . ..
.:.:C .3 2::ch 3'. the

I , ,; '
mtg-“5:655 a: 1;

-‘-‘o. .. ..g - ' '

.4...” ‘aI‘JIE GS 1311:“ 5 C

1" ' u
Wan”
as.

' Q
.AAbaAuE $0 be ‘J‘;:&‘

I

 

 

 

Q Q ‘ . -
p. o o
:‘JQ ‘. the ‘h‘ h‘ “.
v ‘ I. ....nld
,~‘n“ A
3 H _'_~ g. ' .
..u. 31‘ amine“: "
o. O

 

66

Stoicism manifested ideals, but these did not reach the masses.
Epicureanism was more successful. Said Montesquieu: "I believe
that the doctrines of EpicuruS--which were introduced into Rome
towards the close of the republic--did much towards corrupting the
mind and the heart of the Romans. "1

An eye-witness of the age with superior perceptual and analytical
ability wrote as follows concerning the morality of his day:

Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the
glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man or
birds or animals or reptiles. Therefore God gave them up in
the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their
bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth
about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature
rather than the Creator. . . . For this reason God gave them
up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural
relations for unnatural, andthe men likewise gave up natural
relations with women and were consumed with passion for one
another, men committing Shameless acts with men and receiv-
ing in their own persons the due penalty for their error.

And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God
gave them up to a base mind and to impr0per conduct. They
were filled with all manner of wickedness, evil, covetousness,
malice. Full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malignity,
they are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty,
boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish,
faithless, heartless, ruthless. Though they know God's decree
that those who do such things deserve to die, they not only do
them but approve those who practice them. Rom. 1:22-32 RSV.

Paul, of course, had his prejudices, but we find that Seneca
paints a similar picture (ll-)3 {Eii‘ 8). The Stoic philOSOpher, in a
lengthy catalogue, specifies the forms of immorality rampant in his
day. These include the same unnatural crimes to which the Apostle
referred. It hardly seems sufficient to say that every age has its

infamy and that our own society has its share. In contrast to the

 

‘lBaker's translation of Montesquieu, p. 197.

 

 

,Iq' V'A.‘

1 t 1 v. z- .
"-u- ‘ CPA .vw-n .
‘:...- 3. ..lc .....J“ L

, . ~
09 \-';‘Ka"_‘n ..-

‘J‘HL‘HJU, \n.
o

bl»,-..p-“.‘.o -

uzu 3.Jdgnl d
e.

‘ "Si-J- ur- av'

Acoc‘oJat, net--2. C

"it.

tauv an: :15. ff;

' m.... r“ ‘
QL“'J:L unharc .
’n ..l‘.

I‘ 0 ‘ ‘
Lu U.g ‘rflx.'\

‘o C". ..

‘V at 0:13;...

1;: t..‘- : ..‘

i..e wfhkn
I

“fixed, L

36:6 #1", :15. E

 

67

record of the Empire, history indicates that before the Punic Wars,
Rome had housed a community marked by temperance and industry.
It would seem indiSputable that the heady wine of victory and luxury
changed the national character.

The extinction of the free civic life of Greece, the conquests
of Macedon, the foundation of the world-wide empire of Rome,
,had wrought a momentous moral change. In the old city- state,
religion, morals, and political duty were linked in a gracious
unity and harmony. The citizen drew moral support and
inSpiration from ancestral laws and institutions clothed with
almost divine authority. Even Plato does not break away from
the old trammels, but requires the elders of his Ut0pia as a
duty, after they have seen the vision of God, to descend again
to the ordinary tasks of government. But when the corporate
life which supplied such vivid interests and moral support was
wrecked, the individual was thrown back upon himself. Morals
were finally separated from politics. 1

Some particulars will now be considered under general headings.

The Character and Position of Women

 

Constituting as they do half of the race, women in their
character and status mirror the essential nature of their times.
According to the old Roman law, a woman ;with all her property,
by marrying came completely under the power of her husband or of
his father, if the latter was alive. This form of marriage, however,
disappeared under the Empire. With it there disappeared other aspects
of marriage.

The standard of marital fidelity was not lower than now, but it
was confined to the woman. There is no trace of a demand for
a similar standard for the man. The primitive view, in some
ways reasonable enough, was held that the fidelity of the man
is not necessary, because his infidelity does not bring bastards
into the family. The extra-marital connections of the man,

 

lDill, p. 291.

n .
Pu.

n

y

9 2 .
‘sb‘

.
w-P". ~y .- ,
v u
‘u~~.~4 K ‘.

-
,a
a

C
Q' "nO Org.
a;-A“¢¥GIAL hers.» I
.

(II
a .

‘ - - I
I‘vow-A ..neu. -
J-d:o “.3: tools b.\

O"

€t323TTllC 17.29::
.."i. - . ‘ ‘ .
uD...e:dtcC 1:":
V“ . |

llmarrzcc 527;:

mvi _ .

f‘n— 1

Mt .ower 2":
. g.‘

a... ‘ _ f,

the CUHCLLD‘":
‘ ‘L

....‘E: \ _.-
e q‘ntdllgn

352;”, .
:5...5L Cont-em

r.

v-
AA¢.“..:
n
b

2].“:—

68

whether casual or permanent, were regarded as natural. It is
significant that a religious inscription from Asia Minor, which
otherwise inculcates a morality with which any one may be
satisfied, expressly permits connections with women who have
already lost their chastity. Against such connections there was
not the moral ostracism which, in spite of changing conditions,
still constitutes a powerful deterrent, and slavery gave every
facility for keeping women for the satisfaction of lust.

The evil went deeper than merely prostitution for the poor,
and mistresses for the rich. The dissolution of the legal forms
of marriage, which was brought about by women's demand for
economic independence, supported by their fathers and relations,
obliterated the Sharp distinction between the married and the
unmarried state, which, in Spite of everything, is maintained by
modern peoples.1

Some of the most distinguished Emperors, like VeSpasian,
Antonius Pius and Marcus Aurelius, lived in concubinage. In
the lower grades of society the distinction between marriage
and concubinage must have been negligible. 2

These quotations come from an author who, by carefully warning us
against condemning "unjustly the immorality of the Empire, " lays
claim to personal objectivity.3

Certain of the laws of Augustus bear witness in this regard.
He endeavoured to promote marriages by legal bribes but with little
success. Even when marriages took place, the parties preferred to
remain almost or altogether childless. "If a tithe of what Juvenal and
contemporary writers say on this matter is true, licentiousness per-

vaded all ranks of Roman society. " 4

 

1Martin P. Nilsson, Imperial Rome, trans. S. C. Richards
(London: S. Bell and Sons, Ltd., 1926), pp. 323-324,

zIhid., p. 324.
3Ihid., p. 320.

 

4‘Fisher, Beginnings, p. 202.

P .u’ p'_ Y" _
,2.- .31: u.6E‘C3‘1‘\~‘

; F
...... ...-o...e ..5 o
. A . §~
-.-J.v‘~l\.~o~‘\ J. g .'.-
O V

211523.“; 3; 5:65:54".

. 1"- ‘ ‘ 9' .
... 341'“er ...".L'

" Went sexce

*0
n:.:.".‘.p, 1&9“;
. ' V
on: 10\'e--‘xe'e
serve: to .
:‘4 ' .-
E.: lECELCCIV:

: f‘
.F '

0* u.€€Ce 13:, I:
i"./“£N W

\Lae‘e .‘-.~'r‘ 'l

‘.
C15

marl-zed: and s 1
I t

a. .he 3001;;
people. Lilia ...

100k I001 312’; :-

'.C,, p53,;

4.. g
t‘ 1 '
elent (3.00:3) .-
“"‘1Chthe 53“.;

 

69

In the GraecobRoman world the practice of homosexuality was
not provocative of gossip. Philosophers like Plato could refer to it
quite casually.

In Greece the passion for beautiful boys (paiderastia) was
relieved, in some Slight degree, of its grossness, by an in-
fusion of aesthetic sentiment. This kind of love, Springing

in part from the adoration of beauty, assumed all the char-
acteristics of a sentimental attachment between persons of
different sexes. Assiduous devotion to the object beloved,
rivalship, jealousy, deSpair--all the phenomena of courtship
and love-~were connected with this unnatural relation, and
served to cloak, even to the eyes of phiIOSOphers, the shame-
less indecency that belonged to it. There is scarcely a writer
of Greece who directly condemns it. One effect of it was to
disincline men to marriage, as both Plato and Plutarch re-
marked; and so this disgusting vice contributed to the reduction
of the p0pulation of Greece, as well as to the moral ruin of her
people. Like most other Greek vices, this form of impurity
took root and flourished in Rome. Statesmen, judges, generals,
and emperors were guilty of it. At the end of the Sixth century,
A. U. C. , Polybius states that many Romans paid as high as a
talent ($1000) for a beautiful boy. Cicero Speaks of a case in
which the sons of Senators, and youth from the highest families,
obtained from the judges an acquittal, which a bribe of money
could not procure, by this Species of prostitution. Slaves were
more commonly the victims of this base affection. All pains
were then taken to stunt their growth and preserve their fresh
and effeminate appearance; and the same thing was done in the
case of free persons. The fact that stories imputing the vice
of which we are Speaking to a man like Julius Caesar, were in
circulation, and formed a matter for jesting, even if the stories
were false, Shows the measure of toleration that was granted to
practices which in modern times; would render the perpetrator
of them an outcast and an object of loathing. l

 

Thus this practice also prevented the institution of marriage
from occupying in society the place which later Christians would

assign it.-

 

1Ibid. , pp. 205-206

-1 ‘ “ A - - _

,3: enificntc :u
--n-u psi '1‘. _ P-‘v~‘-
25131 SE? 31113.53 ILL

. .. p -

-... .

‘1’ 3.33 '3". : Q‘nzv Or

—-- o .1 annals .v A s-
.

- n z- ' Y '
. _\: ‘1..J" 3: ‘d‘ 1
y” Y‘
.ne Lra‘:7, t.-
c - . “ I
n r _
N. eed, LC TAU\P O —‘
A u q

 

70

The evidence seems sufficient to demonstrate not only that
woman did not occupy the Sphere to which ”Christian" society would
assign her but also the failure in this regard Spawned other significant

moral problems for that age.

The Evaluation of Life

 

The Empire, through its Pax Romana and its policing of land

 

and sea, did much to make life safer than hitherto. Nevertheless, the
estimate placed upon the right to existence was not high. The Augustan
age itself had been ushered in by considerable bloodletting; and if
Plutarch's estimate of the million slain by Caesar in Gaul is only half
exaggerated, we find a barbarism, though not a skill, which equals

that of an atomic age. The cheapness of a slave's life will be considered
in a later section. Here we shall refer only to infanticide, the glada-
torial contests, and the practice of suicide. Regarding infanticide one

has written:

The right of parents to destroy the offSpring which it was
not thought expedient for them to bring up, was recognized in
law and practice. Sometimes such children were left by the
Greeks to perish by starvation in some desolate place; some-
times they were killed outright. The moral teachers of Greece
did not rise above the pOpular feeling on this subject. Aristotle
approves of the custom of exposing infants where it is desired
to prevent an excess of population; and, if, in any state, this is
forbidden, he recommends abortion as a substitute. Plato, in
the Republic, holds that children of bad men, illegitimate
children, and children of parents too far advanced in years,
should be destroyed by exposure; the state is not to be burdened
with them. Among the Romans there had been originally a law
forbidding the destruction of infants; but this law became
practically obsolete. 1

 

lIbid. , pp. 207-208.

 

-
1 -
-~ 'n‘ ‘n l v-
8 fl .
1.1. 33.5! u: JuJ w-
.
‘ I
-O-- ~'v-'- ”'4'?
, v ' .4
.. ...: ‘1...C: u...‘- o a a i
~

~--. 9' . A...‘.-'.Q.. - u.
but. Lac ant—a). ‘5‘ J.
I

. t. . . ,
'TV‘Q‘ . . _. .

..‘chnd \Qr‘i“ C
" ~ no.“ ‘9‘“...

' I V
"w «o n-

4 me a. m

”,~,
p -" Q 1. Al. —
...? 3_ kC:tt:I¢“:<

iii-filial: .
01's ‘1. ha,

.-.:C&Q€ Of lava

St‘aih r .
. ..15 m 1.1:“
C0 . . “
n‘esLSy 95"":
. l

71

AS for the gladatorial contests, it is almost impossible to
picture the large scale on which these were conducted. Julius Caesar
had as many as 320 pairs in conflict, but 10, 000 joined in the combats
of the games under Augustus. In addition to the games conducted
under the authority of the government, there were others provided by
private individuals. The massive Coliseum, which was erected towards
the end of the first century, witnesses to the public appetite for these
bloody contests. Most of the gladiators were prisoners of war, Slaves,
or criminals under sentence. Some wealthy individuals kept their own
gangs of contestants, either exhibiting them themselves, or renting
them out to others. In various places, gladatorial schools existed for
the training of those dedicated to the arena. Such Schools were run
by a veritable corps of officials including physicians, surgeons, fenc-
ing masters etc. The training was rigid, including a measured diet
and nightly confinement to cells. Pompeii's ruins revealed the Skeletons
of gladiators who, chained to their prison, were unable to escape the
cascade of lava.

Strains of instrumental music preceded and accompanied the
contests, which were introduced by a procession of gladiators
around the arena, when the greeting may have been addressed
to the Emperor: ”Ave, Caesar, Imperator, morituri te salu-
tant'. " When a combatant was t‘S.tTUCk down, the victor appealed
to the assembly of Spectators to decide the fate of his fallen
antagonist. Menials touched the slain with hot irons to see that
death was not Simulated. They were dragged out to the dead-
room, where those in whom life was not extinct were deSpatched.
At intervals, servants appeared to Spade up the ground, saturated
with blood and to Spread over it a new coating of sand. The
diversions of the amphitheatre were far from being limited to
conflicts between men, or between men and animals, or among
animals themselves. By ingenious and elaborate machinery,
a stage could be made to rise from beneath the ground, and then
suddenly, with the men, and beasts and whatever else was upon
it, to sink out of sight. At the appointed moment, a platform

‘ would fall to pieces, and the man, who was standing upon it,

 

 

.- 'I .....--
, .. a- 4.3:) ...»4
V.“ .

ym-fi "‘ d

. h' ‘ ...)..L’
to 9.6.55 Dfi.

and 1:111:31:

or

c ' ,
3..-, -n oF" .
S:C».Gksct “‘ ‘ "
o

2': t3 3% 212.26 fit if

Q . ‘
...-..” ,- - L- ..
mi:C¢5Lfi “a: Alton.

3.. :’-'. Y‘n-l...
:1..E 3. Lake r u\ “.2.

2318315 501116 1'5 01

"J 3 r 4 . - .s‘. .1
-. a v- .
--...3o...c a. h.: a

I

9

...»

'- i‘hen we find 1:...

ififitplace for ..a‘

:e combats.2

 

72

would drop into a cage of wild beasts, and be instantly torn
to pieces before the eyes of all. The boys and girls would
be pleased with the gilded apparel and bright crown of one
who came forward in the arena, when they would see the
flames burst forth from his dress, and behold him leaping
and writhing in agony until death ended his torture. 1

Spectacles involving bloodshed on a larger scale were also offered
to the voracious Romans. Augustus, for example, caused an artificial
lake to be made near the Tiber, and here a sea-fight involving three
thousand was held. Years later, a great multitude witnessed from the
shore of Lake Fucinus a sanguinary combat between the nineteen
thousand soldiers of two fleets. The Emperor Claudius presided, with
Agrippina at his side. We gain some impression of the morals of the
day when we find that Ovid prescribed the seats of the amphitheatre
as a fit place for a lover to further his suit during the intervals between
the combats. 2

Chester G. Starr suggests that ”the attitude of an age toward
suicide is often a touchstone by which its individualism may be
measured. "3 In the Roman Empire the right of a man to kill himself
was almost universally accepted.

The treatment of suicide as a right first became evident when

old group attitudes broke down in the Greek world from the fifth
century onward. In Stoic theory suicide was even at times a
duty--like the death of Cato--to diSplay or preserve one's free-
dom. In the Empire Pliny the Elder termed suicide ”the supreme
boon god has bestowed on man among all the penalties of life, "
and it was often preceded by public debate as to one' S justification.
Only as a new concept of the individual's place in the world
emerged did pagan (and Christian) thought begin to deny men this
means of exit.‘

 

1Ibid., pp. 215—216.
2lbid., p. 218.

3Chester G. Starr, Civilization and the Caesars: The Intellectual
Revolution in the Roman Empire (Ithaca, N. Y.: Cornell University
Press, 1954), p. 271.

4Ibid., pp. 271-272.

 

 

‘ ' '0‘ Fa: -¢..
- ~ -- n g
7.,“ ‘c c 5..
,s \ ‘4 .u
...—..I'uay 3. bu .

.
"“‘nrc W‘ .‘

- \
“‘9‘~ccu‘a oafinL-oo
s

”mailman“? '
~.‘:E "‘w‘p, ’ .
: “Wig/6‘s 30 C 2‘.
‘ ~s-A.
fin-
..... = u C..9 -..
dale» ‘hctt A:
“16.110 me 01 v- _.

 

73

Slavery

The institution of slavery is discussed in the introduction to the
analysis of the Epistle to Philemon. Some things, however, should
also be stated here.

Every Roman of even moderate means owned some Slaves and
numerous households had as many as 500. On the great estates up to
twenty thousand might labour as field-hands. The conditions under
which Slaves existed in the Empire varied so broadly that it is difficult
to make a brief summary concerning them. While in some instances
household slaves were so well treated that their devotion to their
masters was unquestionable, and they had considerable freedom, in
other cases, they worked in chains. Examples of the latter are found
in the many underground workhouses which existed in Italy, where
large numbers of slaves in fetters toiled at the mills. As for old or
sick slaves--these were commonly carried to an island in the Tiber
and left to die of starvation.

Not until the time of Hadrian was there any limitation of a master's
power for life and death over a Slave, and the advent of humanitarian
legislation in the age of this Emperor probably sprang from the in-
creasing difficulty of augmenting the slave complement. Prior to
Hadrian:

The stern character of the Roman law appeared in the
powers which it gave to the slaveholder. He was clothed with
absolute authority; he could beat, maim, and kill his Slave with
impunity. The slave could own no property, he could contract
no marriage; whatever connection he was allowed to form with
a woman was dissolved at the command of his owner. Slaves,
when they were allowed Or forced to give testimony, were ex-
amined under the torture. If a master was murdered by a slave,
the Vengeance of the law was visited upon all the slaves of his
household, who were crucified without mercy.1

 

1Fisher, Beginnings, p. 209.

m _

 

>0.-

 

 

74

When we consider the almost irresistible tendency to demorali—
zation among the slaves themselves, the temptations to perfidy,
licentiousness, and almost every other vice to which they were
exposed, and when we consider the baleful influence which fell,
from the unlimited control of all these human beings, upon the
masters, and the contamination of the young by their familiarity
with slaves, from the beginning of life, we shall feel that the
amount of evil resulting from Roman slavery is beyond calculation.l

These are some of the aSpects of Roman society which the subse—
quent Western culture was to decry. The picture from the viewpoint of
most moderns is heavily shaded, if not entirely black.

Reviewing this brief outline of life in the first century, we are
compelled to admire the achievements of Greek culture and Roman
energy.7‘ It is apparent that the Empire possessed a greater degree of
glory than any powers which preceded or followed it; but as in the case
with other cultures, its glory was tarnished and proved superficial at
last.

This was the challenging world into which Saul of Tarsus was
born. AS Paul the Apostle, he was destined to be the chief agent in
transmitting to the West the main elements of a new and enduring

culture.

 

1lbid., p. 211.

2Education in the Graeco—Roman world is discussed in the chapter
"The Age of the Second Sophistic. " Similarly, other pertinent historical
details are included throughout the analyses of the Pauline addresses.

 

CHAPTER II

THE ERA OF THE SECOND SOPHISTIC

What need there of long speeches in the Senate
when the best men are soon of one mind, or of endless
harangues to the people when political questions are
decided not by an ignorant multitude, but by one man of
pre-eminent wisdom ?

Tacitus. "Dialogue Concerning Oratory. "

Great thoughts, great achievements, and significant and artistic
expression seem linked together. Each mountain peak in sociological
development has been usually accompanied by a Significantly high-
1evel expression in the arts. The age of Pericles, the zenith of the
Roman Republic, the eras of the Renaissance and the Reformation, the
seventeenth to the nineteenth centuries in imperial England, and the
nineteenth century in the United States, witnessed a burgeoning of the
arts which set lofty standards for succeeding years. Similarly we
find a resultant povery of aesthetic expression in eras of social
degeneration and decline. Probably the field of rhetoric offers more
historical illustrations of the foregoing generalizations than can be
found elsewhere.

The classical age in Greece gave birth to the principles of rhetoric
which, because of inherent worth, have been constantly reasserted from
that age to this. Following the death of Aristotle however, there came

a change for the worse.

75

 

 

Whereas 1:: In:

I ‘ '
swash V'"“"‘
3" ...‘u'h o ‘50 v'e‘

-.' . ..'.‘« ,9
C.‘€3.lle .. -‘- .
...: .. unw- - .
3n).- e;1...c C

. , ..
nO-- o c- . ~-
\ p4
...:Q. coo get..\'

I' - ...
dudifiagc:1t

1m: .- 1 . .
S““‘lcre"’ “ '1

h.... s .
~.u¢(3rs:‘l0 a: A“ 1.,

. hang“
\

2::6 D 1“ ' ‘

1:.2
‘ixfld
eadVant—-
. E
.331):

2 5325
Th; ‘
. ,d.

\1 p. 98

 

76

Whereas in the better days of Greek achievements the virtue

of moderation and balance had been distinguishing marks of
creative effort, now the tendencies toward excess and affect-
ation became apparent. This unhappy circumstance asserted
itself in Hellenistic prose, and particularly in oratory. About
250 B. C. , Hegesias of Magnesia became the leader of the
”Asiatic" school of thought. In violation of Aristotelian and
Isocratean standards, this school produced an artificial style
which, in the words of Atkins, ”depended for its effects on
epigrams, strained metaphors, false antitheses, over-elaborate
rhythms, and the like." This style, which Atkins claims was

"a breakdown of earlier traditions, rather than a fusion of the
Asiatic and Hellenic geniuses, " exercised considerable influence
throughout the third and second centuries B. C.1

Similarly, when the Roman Republic merged into the thinly guised
dictatorship» of Augustus, and democratic oratory was greatly lessened,
there occurred the inevitable decline of classical rhetoric. Thonssen
and Baird declare that "This decline was well under way by Quintilian's
time. He tried to revive the spirit of Ciceronianism while protesting
the false tastes that were taking hold of the age. ”2

This new era has been named "the second sophistic. " By the time
of Tacitus in 81 A. D. , the trend towards ”Asianism" had become per-
vasive; and hereafter it dominated education and public speaking practice
for several centuries.

Before considering the nature and causes of the "second sophistic"
it would be advantageous to summarise the ideals and precepts of
classical rhetoric. Only against such a background can the character-
istics and values of the sophistic trend be appraised.

It cannot be overemphasized that thus to consider the status of
rhetoric in these centuries is simultaneously to measure the standards
of the prevailing education in these times. In the words of Donald

Lemen Clark:

 

lThonssen and Baird, Speech Criticism, p. 96.

2Ibid., p. 98.

77

. . . in the Greco—Roman schools education was almost exclu-
sively education in rhetoric, which the ancients considered an
adequate preparation for life for free men, whom custom
debarred from handicrafts and all activities involving manual
dexterity. 1

Similarl Thonssen and Baird lainl state that ”the entire educational
Y P Y
plan centered about rhetoric. ”2

In Rome, as in the Greek- speaking countries, there were three
successive steps in instruction. Normally these correspond

to the three types of school taught by three Special teachers.

At seven the child entered the primary school, which he quit at
eleven or twelve for the school of the grammaticus. When he

was of age to receive the toga virilis, about fifteen, he passed

to the school of the rhetor. The advanced studies normally

lasted till he was about twenty, although they might be prolonged.3

The work of the ancient Grammar school in theory was to give
instruction in all of the seven liberal arts. Literature, rhetoric, dia-
lectics, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music constituted the
learning field. In practice, however, emphasis upon the mathematical
arts was left for special schools, and instead the trivium's language
arts were kept to the fore. In his Epilog, Clark once more stresses
the almost synonymous nature of rhetoric and ancient education.

. . . I wish to recall and emphasize the habitual association of
rhetoric in the best of ancient schools with all the liberal arts
which went to make up encyclopedic learning (encyclios paideia)
or cycle of instruction. The same teacher, whether in grammar
school or school of rhetoric, who taught the arts of speaking and
writing, also read great poems, histories, and public addresses
of earlier ages with the boys. The Roman schools did not suffer

 

1Donald Lemen Clark, Rhetoric in Greco—Roman Education.
(New York: Columbia University Press, 1957), pp. 64-65.

Z"Thonssen and Baird, p. 98.

3C1ark, p. 60, citing Marrou‘s Histoire de l'education dans
l' antiquit é .

 

 

 

 

 

 

78

fromdepartmentalization as ours do. Rhetoric was not something
to be taught as a separate and isolated skill, but an organic art,
at work "discovering all possible means to persuasion in any
subject. "1

What then were the principles that were stressed when classical
rhetoric reigned in the ancient schools ? Aristotle, Cicero and Quin—
tilian provide the answer. While Quintilian lived during the second
sophistic he was essentially a classicist.

Cicero in his De Partitione Oratoria tapped rhetoric with a silver

 

hammer so to Speak, causing it to fall into three divisions. (1):}:
oratoris i. e. the Speaker's resources as a Speaker; (2) m i. e. the
Speech itself; and (3) quaestioi. e. the Speech situation, which involves
both the nature of the subject and the audience. Let us consider each
of these primary divisions.

The vis oratoris included five subdivisions. While these are

 

implicit in Aristotle they are not formally set out. Before the days of
Cicero, however, it became fashionable among rhetoricians to discuss:
(l) Inventio: Discovery of Speech materials; (2) DiSpositio: Arranging
of Speech materials; (3) Elocutio: Or the clothing with language of the
assembled materials; (4) Memoria: The fixing of the Speech in memory;

(5) Pronuntiatio: Or the delivery of the discourse.

 

AS for oratio this also had been divided into parts. Many followed
the suggested six parts named by the Ad Herennium. They were (1)
Exordium: An initial approach designed to make the audience attentive
and friendly. (2) Narratio: A statement of facts Slanted in favor of the

Speaker. (3) Divisio or Partitio: A preview of the main points the

 

speaker intends to elaborate. (4) Confirmatio: Affirmative proof.

(5) Confutatio: Refutation or rebuttal. (6) Conclusio or Peroratio:

 

Conclusion.

 

lIbid. , p. 263.

 

 

 

79

Turning to quaestio, or the Speech- situation, we find that
Cicero suggested that this could be one of two kinds. Either the speech
situation involved a general discussion or it was concerned with

particular persons or occasions. The latter, called causa or ”case"

 

covered the Aristotelian categories of forensic, epideictic and
deliberative Speaking.

We shall next consider these parts individually, but necessarily
treat them with brevity.

Among the five resources of the speaker, Inventio was pre-
eminent. The weight of matter transcends its dress in importance, and
therefore as many of the pertinent facts as possible Should be investi-
gated. To help oneself in this matter required that the status of the
case be determined. This was the vital hinge on which the main issues
turned. Such questions as: whether a thing is, what it is, of what kind
is it, are the most helpful. Does the matter depend upon a question of
f_aE£,_ of definition,or of quality?

The next step will be to decide how to apply his facts so as to
persuade his audience. Aristotle had suggested that the primary modes
of persuasion were three.

The first kind reside in the character of the Speaker; the
second consist in producing a certain attitude in the hearer; the
third appertain to the argument pr0per, in so far as it actually
or seemingly demonstrates. . . . The character of the Speaker
is a cause of persuasion when the speech is so uttered as to make
him worthy of belief; . . . . Secondly, persuasion is effected
through the audience, when they are brought by the speech into
a state of emotion; for we give very different decisions under the
sway of pain or joy, and liking or hatred. . . . Thirdly, per-
suasion is effected by the arguments, when we demonstrate the
truth, real or apparent, by such means as inhere in particular

cases. 1

lAristotle, The Rhetoric of Aristotle, trans. Lane Cooper
(New York: Appleton-Century, Inc., 1932) 1:2.

 

 

 

 

 

-"l

 

 

 

80

The "places" or "tepics" of argument gave more detailed assistance in
devising arguments. This involved the asking of the questions of how,
what, where, when,and why? Cicero listed as places of argument the
following: definition, contrast, similarity, dissimilarity, consistency,
inconsistency, conjunction, repugnancy, cause and effect, distribution
as of genus and species, or of past and present time, or of magnitude
(more, equal, or less).1

Regarding diSpositio, this involved not only the familiar divisions
of exordium, statement, proof and refutation, and peroration, but also
the manner of marshalling the vital arguments. Most rhetoricians
felt that the strongest arguments should appear first, with some out-
standing ones reserved for the peroration, and the rest placed in the
body of the Speech. Cicero, however, particularly stresses that the
method of arrangement should always be adapted to the purpose of the
speech. For example, the sequence adopted for an epideictic speech
might be chronological.

Elocutio at its best embraced the four virtues of correctness,
clearness, embellishment, and appropriateness. The usual analysis of
styles stressed the grand, the medium, and the plain, which adjectives
explain themselves.

Memoria included both learning a speech by heart or the master-
ing of its substance in order to Speak extemporaneously. Quintilian
felt that the former was best if the speaker was blessed with both a good
memory and ample time. Otherwise the second procedure must be

followed.

Pronunciatio includes both the use of the voice and the use of

 

gesture in delivery. Demosthenes is the classic example of the import-

ance of this element. Cicero declared that delivery has "the sole

 

1Cicero, De Partitione Oratoria, ii.7.

 

-~‘_-_._~.

 

81

and supreme power in oratory. "1

According to Quintilian's doctrine, voice and diction, like
literary style, should be pure, clear, embellished, and appro-
priate. Speech must be pure and correct Latin with no trace of
the foreign or provincial. Speech must be clear through careful
enunciation and observance of pr0per pauses. It should be em-
bellished and can be if the voice has pleasing quality and is well
controlled. Beauty of Speech will be aided by careful avoidance
of such vices as monotony, straining, excessive rapidity or
slowness, panting, Spraying saliva; chanting, and Singing.
Voice and diction will be apprOpriate if they are adapted to the
subject of the Speech. And he gives shrewd advice on how

to use the imagination in stimulating emotions the speaker does
not feel. "In representing such feelings, the first requisite is
to impress ourselves as much as possible, to conceive lively
ideas of things, and to allow ourselves to be moved by them as
if they were real; and then the voice, as an intermediate organ,
will convey to the minds of the judges that impression which it
receives from our own. ..2

Having briefly touched upon the Speaker's resources, let us now con-

sider the Speech itself.

The most well-known summary of the traditional division of a
Speech is found in De Oratore:

. . . I had been taught that before we speak on the point at issue,
the minds of the audience should be conciliated; next, our case
should be stated; then the point in controversy Should be estab-
lished; then our allegations should be confirmed and those ad-
vanced refuted; and that at the conclusion of our speech what is
in our favour should be amplified and expanded,what favors the
adversary should be weakened and demolished.3

Aristotle had pointed to the need for an appropriate Exordium

when he asserted that "It is plain that introductions are addressed not

 

lCicero, De Oratore trans. J. S. Watson (London: Henry G.
Bohn, 1855), iii. 56.

ZClark, p. 11 l .

3Watson, trans. De Oratore, I. xxxi. 143.

 

 

L

 

82

to ideal hearers but to hearers as we find them. "1 Quintilian suggests

that:

. . . he who is going to Speak Should reflect what he has to

say, before whom, at what time or place, under what circum-
stance, under what pre-possessions of the public; what opinion
it is likely that the judge has formed previous to the commence-
ment of the pleadings; and what the speaker has to desire or
deprecate. Nature herself will lead him to understand what he

ought‘to say first. "7‘
The same authority summarises the nature of the statement by declar-
ing that it is an exposition adapted to persuade of what has been done,
or is supposed to have been done.3 Obviously it is chiefly the forensic
speech which requires a statement of facts. The usual school formula
for narratio was that of Isocrates, that the statement of facts Should be
brief, clear, and plausible.

The following quotation lays down a consideration of primary
importance regarding our next division, that of proof or confirmatio.

When we consider proof in rhetoric, we must be careful
to remember that rhetoric does not concern itself with scien-
tifically demonstrated truths, about which there is no debate,
but with such contingent and approximate truths as lead to dif-
ferences of opinion. We do not argue or persuade in favor of the
probability of a proposition in Euclid. We demonstrate. Hence
the Latin use of confirmatio as the term for rhetorical proof is
less misleading than our habitual use in English of the one word,
proof, both for scientific demonstration and for persuasive
argument used in support of the probability of one side of a
debatable issue.4

 

 

lC00per, trans. The Rhetoric of Aristotle, III. 14.

 

2Quintilian, Institutes of Oratory, trans. J. S. Watson (London:
G. Bell and Sons, 1903), IV.i.52.

31bid., IV.ii.31.
4Clark, pp. 117-118.

 

 

   

83

The materials of proof us ed in the art of rhetoric fall into two cate-
gories, the enthymeme, with the maxim included in-this category,
and secondly, the example. An enthymeme can be an incomplete
syllogism with the major or minor premise omitted. In the enthymeme
of Aristotle's conception, however, the conclusion may be drawn from
a premise based on general opinion, rather than one of universal
application. Here the argument is based on probability.

It seems apparent that Quintilian did not believe that oratory
should consist of mere logical chains. After discussing deductive
reasoning, he adds:

It seems to me that I have gone through the sacred ritual of
those who deliver precepts on rhetoric. But one must exercise
judgment in using the precepts. For though I do not think it
unlawful to use syllogisms occasionally in a speech, yet I should
by no means like it to consist wholly of syllogisms, or to be
crowded with a mass of epicheiremata and enthyrnemes, for it
would then resemble the dialogs and diSputations of logicians,
rather than oratorical pleadings. . . . For what true orator

has ever spoken in such a way?1

Regarding the use of examples Cicero wrote:

The greatest support of a probability is furnished by first an
example, then the introduction of a parallel case (Similitude);
sometimes a fable, even if it be incredible, nevertheless
influences people. 2

Aristotle felt that examples were best used in the form of supplementary
evidence after the stating of an enthymeme.

If they follow the enthyrnemes, they have the effect of witnesses
giving evidence, and this always tells. For the same reason,
if you put your examples first you must give a large number

of them; if you put them last, a Single one is sufficient.3

 

lInstitutes, v. xiv. 27,32.
zDe Oratore, XI. 40.
3Cooper, trans. The Rhetoric II. 20.

 

'x.

‘—

 

 

 

44, ,

 

 

 

 

 

84

In their discussion of the peroration most of the ancients recommend
similar principles. The thoughts of brevity and surnmarization pre-
dominate. Aristotle also suggests devices of conciliation, amplifi-
cation, and appeals to the feelings. 1

Finally we have in the speech Situation the third major aSpect of
the rhetorical art as viewed by the classicists. Herein is included an
investigation into the nature of the subject, the Speaker's purposes
and the method of adapting the Speech to the Specific audience addressed.

Hermagoras is credited with distinguishing between the quaestio infinita,

 

the thesis or general question, and the quaestio finita, question which is

 

limited by certain definite Specifications of time, place, and person.
This latter is also called the cause or case.
In the Orator, Cicero gives this advice:

Whenever he can, the orator will divert the controversy from
particular persons and circumstances to universal abstract
questions, for he can debate a genus on wider grounds than a
species. Whatever is proved of the whole is of necessity proved
of the part. A question thus transferred from specific persons
and circumstances to a discussion of a universal genus is called
a thesis. 2

It Should be remembered that in his younger years Cicero had

asserted in De Inventione that the orator should be concerned only with

 

the cause. In De Oratore, however, he points out that all controversies
can be and Should be related to the essence and nature of a general
question.3 Clark declares regarding this mature view of Cicero:

Thus Cicero, in enlarging on the thesis as a legitimate
literary form adapted to the discussion of many questions not
related to the law courts or the senate, was enabled to find a
place for a number of his own literary works, including all his

 

11bid., 11. 18.
2De Oratore, XIV. 45-46.

 

31bid., II. xxxi. 133-134.

 

 

...

 

 

 

l1-

 

 

 

85

discussions of the nature, value, and use of oratory and his
essays on duty, politics, philosophy, friendship, old age, and
the nature of the gods. By the very nature and variety of his
own interests he was forced,almost as Isocrates was, to take
a broad view of rhetoric or the philosophy of the word and to
include a great deal that Aristotle's narrow view of rhetoric
excluded. 1

Aristotle had dealt only with the limited question or cause under the
headings of the epideictic, the deliberative, and the judicial. Occasional
oratory is concerned with praise or blame and is delivered from the
standpoint of the present. Aristotle recognized that this epideictic
Speech often bordered on other types. He said ”To praise a man is in
one respect akin to urging a course of action. ”

That rhetoric which is called deliberative has also been referred
to as political, advocating as it does some course of action relative to
the future. According to Cicero the objective of deliberation is utility.
This will be agreeable to the audience. The Speaker will ask such
questions as--Is the proposed course of action possible? IS it necessary?
Is it expedient or profitable in a material way? IS it honorable?

As a Speech must be adapted, not alone to the truth, but also

to the opinions held by the audience, we must first realize that
the people are of two kinds, one uneducated and uncultivated who
prefer utility to honor, and the other humane and cultivated who
place honor above all things. 2

The third kind of rhetoric has to do with the justice of actions
which took place in the past. Forensic rhetoric belongs to the advocate,
and its ideal theater is in the court of law. The matters of the status
and of the fivefold division of the speech particularly apply to judicial
oratory. Particular attention should be given by the forensic Speaker

to the study of motivation and of all laws, civic and natural.

 

1Clark, p. 132.
2De Oratore, I. 90.

 

 

 

 

 

   

86

We have briefly named most of the essentials of classical rhetoric.
How influential were these? To what extent did they pervade learned
society?

Although these precepts of ancient rhetoric are clearly
designed primarily to train boys and young men to win audiences
by addressing them orally in public, we must recall. that from
the earliest time, these precepts also guided those who addressed
the public in writing. The epistles of St. Paul and Seneca,
whether read aloud to groups or passed from hand to hand in
manuscript, derive thdir structure and style from the same
precepts of rhetoric as do the speeches of Demosthenes or Cicero.
So do the verse epistles of Horace and the political, moral, and
philosophical essays (or ”written speeches") of Isocrates and
Cicero. Indeed all ancient literature, verse and prose, was ran-
sacked by the professors of grammar and rhetoric to furnish
models of rhetorical style for schoolboys; and the precepts of
style elaborated by the rhetoricians guided all writers of Greek
and Latin, who in their boyhood had received instruction in the
schools of grammar and rhetoric. l (emphasis ours)

 

 

 

 

Having considered the nature of classical rhetoric, we would now
enquire into the nature of the rhetoric of the age of the second sophistic.
On page 76 the cause of the new rhetoric was intimated. This should
first be expanded before analysing the constituents of p0pular oratory
in this era.

Baldwin has well said that s0phistic is ”. . . the historic
demonstration of what oratory becomes when it is removed from urgency

"2 By so declaring, Baldwin would refer us to the age

of subject matter.
that succeeded Cicero's impeachment of Verres. Democracy faded
and the voice of the people was no longer heard in deliberative affairs.
Government became "top heavy, " and the officials of the Emperors,
under the guidance of their masters, made all the necessary decisions.

Neither deliberative or forensic oratory could flourish as before, and

 

1Clark, pp. 142-143.

2Charles Sears Baldwin, Medieval Rhetoric and Poetic (Gloucester,
Mass.: Peter Smith, 1959), p. 7.

 

 

 

o u
‘e.
'o I
e
a,.
p
‘
.,.‘
.“

 

‘\<.

 

It!

 

 

87

thus the field of occasional oratory with its encomium, or panegyric,
was the only field left available for public Speakers. Here was an
area of address which catered to personal trimnphs and exhibitionism,
and these soon came to the fore.

Under the dictatorship of the principate freedom of discussion
in the school and in the forum ceased. It was not safe to dis—
cuss live issues. The more remote from reality or fictitious
a theme was, the safer it was. Rhetoric is a living force only
under some form of democratic or republican government.

It dies or is emasculated under tyrannies, absolutisms, or
dictatorships. 1

Clark also refers to Harry Caplan's study ”The Decay of Eloquence

at Rome in the First Century. "2

After quoting at length from those
first century writers who discussed oratory's decline, Caplan says
”We learn that some of these clearly realized that eloquence flourishes
best on soil dedicated to free institutions. "3

The new rhetorical practice came to control the theory of edu-
cation; and thus seed was planted for an enduring harvest. Apart from
Quintilian and Tacitus, there were to be few effective critics of sophistic
for several centuries. Even Augustine's disparagement of it was only
indirect, as he pointed to a better way.

Turning now to the nature of sophistic we are first impressed
with the fact that the rhetoric of this age was an end in itself rather than
a means. It was Asianism revived. Its purpose was to give effective-

ness to the speaker, whereas the purpose of classical rhetoric was to

give effectiveness to truth. While Invention had headed the list of the

 

lClark, p. 216.

2Studies in Speech and Drama in Honor of Alexander M. Drummond,
pp. 295-325.

31bid.

 

IJ

 

‘-..

 

.‘u

 

o a
.“
'~

 

 

88

former canons of rhetoric, and Style and Delivery had been placed in
the opposite position, this was reversed by the sophistic tendency.

The new custom placed Style and Delivery in the position of primacy
and almost ignored Invention, except as it existed in ready-to-hand
forms. As previously mentioned, it seemed as though the compulsion
of great themes which demanded eXpreSSion had ceased. Had Aristotle
or Isocrates been able to behold the new trend, it would have seemed
to them that the whole world was now but one vast play-house and that
every Speaker's platform had become a stage. Declamation was not
now an exercise to aid one striving towards perfection, it was, instead,
an opportunity for exhibitionism. Virtuosity was the only real virtue.

Instead of training youth to lead in public policy and to secure
justice for individuals, declamatio had become an end in itself,
the rhetor's own kind of oratory. As an exhibition of skill it

was his easiest means of winning pupils, and of holding them by
letting them exhibit themselves. The inherent vice of arti-
ficiality, which Quintilian admits by implication, he nevertheless
assigns entirely to perverted educational practise. He would
recall declamatio from invention to actuality, and from diSplay
to exercise. 1

This reference to declamation as Quintilian found it points out
the direction of emphasis in his time.

The young people of the day had to have their natural and
national liking for the beauty of the Spoken word satisfied.
The declamation as a work of literary art had become an
end in itself. 7‘

The criticism of Petronius, written about the middle of the first century
A. D. agrees with the picture depicted above when it declares that:

". . . the net result of all these high-flown themes and the empty thunder
of their platitudes is that, when the pupils make their (19133.5. in the

 

1Charles Sears Baldwin, Ancient Rhetoric and Poetic (Gloucester,
Mass.: Peter Smith, 1959), p. 71.‘

 

2Thonssen and Baird, p. 99, citing W. A. Edward's Suasoriae of
Seneca the Elder, pvaiii-xix.

 

 

 

 

IA'

 

 

 

89

courts, they feel themselves translated into a foreign world. "1

It would seem that the exercises departed further and further
from reality and the more fantastic and unreal the themes, the better
they suited the new declaimers. It is significant that Tacitus, a
contemporary of Quintilian, declares the old-fashioned method of
teaching to have been vastly superior to the methods used in the schools
of declamation of his day.2 Donald Lemen Clark of our own day con-
tends that even the declamations under the Empire served good purposes
when taught by "sensible and experienced teachers. "3 Clark adds
however, that in this Opinion he differs from Bossier, Bornecque,
Summers, Caplan, and Baldwin. Probably, however, he misunder-
stands the latter, who were ridiculing declamation only as taught by
soPhists and not that kind of declamation approved by Quintilian and
other classical writers.

Let us look more closely at the exercises which were introductory
to declamation. The work of Hermogenes is probably the best known

as regards the progymnasmata. He wrote in the second century and

 

belonged to the university city of Tarsus.

In Hermogenes there are in all twelve exercises which
introduce the boys to the rudiments, at least, of all three kinds
of rhetoric. Deliberative rhetoric is represented by fable,
tale, chreia, proverb, thesis, legislation; judicial rhetoric by
confirmation and refutation, and commonplace; epideictic
rhetoric by encomiuzn, impersonation, comparison, and
description. 4

 

lIbid., citing Petronius: The Satyricon, p. l.

 

2‘Tacitus, "A Dialogue on Oratory, " 30-35, The Complete Works
of Tacitus, trans. Alfred John Church and William Jackson Brodribb
(New York: The Modern Library, 1942), pp. 758-764.

3Clark, p. 251.
41bid., p. 181.

 

 

”‘1

There an

N.‘
teacher :0 Sent

. 9
n.3,-..” "r.
.AG».C.S%A . Act

1261' were YES";
5631162211035 551‘.

cevelauznz the:

grammar, Li's
3111 there 31.-g;

Pdgm wart-g.-

.
h:

let “Other 5

“it: that 1119,. g-

35312111ar,

Practice 1:1 .-

153318
es. oAss a s

of Eu c : '
51-0133 Whlc
AA'

...:

.is .' .

in

\51 "Or t
r,_ .3 he prof
$103.1;

90

There are several very interesting things for the modern
teacher to note in these ancient Greco-Roman elementary
exercises in Speaking and writing. For one thing, the earliest
of them, those practiced while the boys were still studying in
the grammar school, were closely related to the study of
literature. The boys paraphrased and retold stories which
they were reading. They were trained to utilize proverbs and
sententious sayings from the poets as amplifying material in
developing themes. They were trained to make Similar use of
episodes from history and from biography. . . .

Another interesting thing to notice is the preoccupation
with religion, morals, and right conduct. With the Greeks and
Romans, Homer and other early poets took the place the Bible
has with us. Consequently the teachers of grammar, with whom
the boys read these poets, took on something of the function of
the Sunday school teacher as well as those of the teacher of
grammar, literature and composition. Of course pagan morals
were taught. There was nothing about faith, hope and charity;
but there was frank and thorough inculcation of the cardinal
pagan virtues of fortitude, justice, prudence, and temperance. 1

 

Yet another striking characteristic of the progymnasmata was
the fact that they mainly dwelled upon the general rather than the
particular.

Practice in declamation followed the completion of the elementary
exercises. As a school exercise declamation fell into two divisions--
the suasoria which used historical or quasi-historical settings, and had
for its objective the persuasion of one individual or of a group towards

or away from a course of action; and secondly, the controversia,which

 

was related to the forensic oratory of the law courts. In this latter
exercise fictitious legal cases were engaged in, with the student acting

either for the prosecution or the defense. Controversia was held by

 

the Romans to be the more important of the two kinds of declamation.

The themes for Declamatio were Similar and in some cases
identical to those employed by Seneca. Typical ones were

 

lClark, pp. 208- 209.

 

-5... - .q I - ~,O‘ O
.... .11: 11:6 3. 3.."

a L

...-m... 7‘ ...,r.
-:--:..A:»13-4. U. ...]

‘ n '
.... -
. Pfiw‘r'qt W‘.‘ 0"
~~ 3d J......‘C.. talc L

.

 

 

91

historical or semi-historical such as "Demosthenes swears

that he did not take the bribe, " and ”Should the trOphies erected
by the Greeks be taken down?" Fictitious themes included

"The man who fell in love with a statue" and "The Magician who
wished to die because he was unable to kill another magician, an
adulterer. "1

It should be noted that the classical schools were in agreement
with the use of both the elementary exercises and the practice of
declamation. During the age of the second sophistic these were still
the prominent methods of instruction; but they had changed in purpose
as witnessed to by Quintilian, Tacitus, Petronius, and other writers.

Quintilian conjectures that Demetrius Phalereus invented the
declamation on fictitious subjects. Originally a school exer-
cise, it soon became little more than a showpiece permitting
display and exhibitionism.

Quintilian approved of the declamation, as he understood
it, but not as it was practiced about him. He admitted that the
"practice has so degenerated through the fault of the teachers,
that the license and ignorance of declaimers have been among
the chief causes that have corrupted eloquence. " So he recom-
mended its use as an exercise having "a very close resemblance
to reality, " even though admitting that the current practice was
out of gear with his intentions. Z

 

This misuse of declamation illustrates best the most striking
characteristic of the SOphistic, which was virtuosity. The accompany-
ing stress upon improvisation, memory and delivery reveals this same
characteristic. A later quotation from Lucian of Samosata indicates
the emphasis upon these elements by sophistic orators. Baldwin
describes the customary methods of improvisation:

The improvisation was mainly of style. It consisted of fluency
of rehandling, of variations upon themes, and in patterns, so
common as to constitute a stock-in-trade. It permitted the use
over and over again not only of stock examples and illustrations,

 

lBaldwin, Medieval Rhetoric and Poetic, pp. 10-11.
2Thonssen and Baird, p. 98.

 

,.,.;..
T‘he sarne *ol‘t
Au

' 9:.» °'
‘. .- “-uoh 9"

' ' " ‘ ””5:
31521653. er,

' o. .-
..... .. ,
55.6iJU-DUO

.

Q “ —

a 9H «m
FJrLuECU .g-
.- ‘ ':.‘. . ’.-‘
Sec 411.8 CS. -
' . ;‘~~
the rnznc ..0..

. , . .-J '
3.212 1118 Clix. .

~-‘. “n.1,: :.
EJCA. b‘JbJILQV\
. ‘

n ~ 0 a;,,.;_
0" \ ‘0 GH‘A‘I'I
,:' g:..1.:..q,
0‘ Inuli‘gqll. :
posed 110331 St

' 1
umformlv re:

Country was 1
products, 1:.
learning and

indeed the Wk“
The element

\

.riial habits of f

The fourth a

stain is the ele

\

4:119. literary 6.1
it 1‘

..a1 ,and vehe:

his in an e

; d‘QQ
:1,-

’1'!

92

but of successful phrases, modulated periods, even whole
descriptions. It was the art of a technician, not of a composer. l

The same writer tells us that dilation, after virtuosity, was the
next characteristic feature of the soPhistic. Dilation depended upon
the devices of ecPhrasiS, with both higher and lower levels of decorative
description.

The third characteristic of the oratory of this age was that of
pattern.

For the composition of the whole Speech SOphistic generally
had little care. That planned sequence, that leading on of
the mind from point to point, which is the habit of great orators
and the chief means of cogency, presupposes urgency toward a
goal. Sephistic often had no goal. The audience need be won
only to admiration, not to decision. . . . As if to mark the lack
of individual planning for cogency, SOphistic is commonly com-
posed upon set patterns. No other body of oratory has so
uniformly resigned itself to forms. . . . The encomium of a
country was expected to deal with its situation, climate,
products, its race, founders, government, its advancement in
learning and literature, its festivals and its buildings, unless
indeed the whole encomium were based on one of these topics.

2
The elementary exercises referred to earlier also illustrate the
typical habits of form or pattern in sophistic oratory. i
The fourth and final characteristic of sophistic suggested by

Baldwin is the elaboration of style. The devices employed for this

 

include literary allusion and archaism, decorative imagery, balance,
clausala,and vehemence.

It is in an essay of Lucian of Samosata (c. 180 A. D.) written to
caricature contemporary Speaking practices that we find a graphic, if
overdrawn, picture of the sophistic trend. Contrast his counsel with
the classical model which has been previously outlined. Regarding

qualifications and rules he has the following to offer:

 

11bid., p. 15.
zBaldwin, pp. 20-21.

 

 

them, unre-

be hah’isgmg
the thickest

used by the .
)011 ’10 li- -Q
Demgsther‘t
the 3‘18!) “ft:
PiECes the: .
S‘PPI) Of :3:

theans. EEC},

93

Bring with. you, then, as the principal thing, ignorance;
secondly, recklessness, and thereto effrontery and Shameless—
ness. Modesty, respectability, self-restraint, and blushes
may be left at home, for they are useless and somewhat of a
hindrance to the matter in hand. But you need also a very loud
voice, a shameless Singing delivery, and a gait like mine. . . .
Let your clothing be gaily-coloured. . . . Have also many
attendants, and always a book in hand. 1

. . . pay especial attention to outward appearance, and to the
graceful set of your cloak. Then cull from some source or
other fifteen, or anyhow not more than twenty, Attic words,
drill yourself carefully in them, and have them ready at the tip
of your tongue. . . . Whenever you Speak, Sprinkle in some of
them as a relish. Never mind if the rest is inconsistent with
them, unrelated, and discordant. Only let your purple stripe
be handsome and bright, even if your cloak is but a blanket of
the thickest sort. Hunt up obscure, unfamiliar words, rarely
used by the ancients. . . . AS for reading the classics, don't
you do it--either that twaddling Isocrates or that uncouth
Demosthenes or that tiresome Plato. No, read the speeches of
the men who lived only a little before our own time, and these
pieces that they call 'exercises,‘ in order to secure from them a
supply of provisions which you can use up as occasion arises.

2

Concerning Invention the counsel of Lucian is to avoid effort by
all means. Eschew hard themes and the classical writers. In the
moral realm this avoidance of stern endeavour will lead to personal
effrontery and a sordid private life, in short--the reverse of what
classical writers would have urged as cultivating e_th_qs. AS for _l_<_)_g_p_s_,
Lucian warns against logical sequence or reasoned presentations.
In their stead strained analogies and odd precedents should be employed.
"If you are Speaking of a case of assault or adultery at Athens, mention

instances in India or Ecbatana. "

 

1Thonssen and Baird, p. 104. Citing Lucian, The Loeb Classical
Library, IV, 155.

21bid., pp. 104-105. Citing Lucian, ibid., 155-159.

 

 

. ...,
enzvfiuo: :‘r. C.
. infioonlh

r
h
u

Iaie :0 pen: a

,.
1: 11:5:

I’D
. 7
n1
,
D

U

It ielivery 5'.

u
h.‘lt
slalu‘.‘

sophistic is 1‘:
excess anj ,4.

be Escaped.
SUCh ‘3':

Skill is a‘fail.

and PrOgr

ESE
0f Words C

311‘.
cepthn. T t:
it

94

Regarding Arrangement, Lucian urges:

Take no pains at all that the first thing, just because it really
is first, shall be said at the appr0priate time, and second
directly after it, and the third after that, but say first what-
ever occurs to you first. . . .1

This caricature emphasizes style and delivery as the chief
ingredients in the presentation which will give fame to the Speaker.
The delivery Should be such as to fascinate the audience, rendering the
orator the cynosure of their attention constantly. To this end the
sophistic Speaker should frequently slap his thigh, parade the platform,
and manifest all kinds of extreme bodily actions.

Baldwin summarises excellently when he says:

It is the drum that marks sophistic. Few of the devices of style
so carefully cultivated are sophistic in themselves. What is
sophistic is the use of them all, as from a classified store, in
excess and with insistent emphasis. The sophistic style cannot
be escaped. It is always saying, Here is style.

Such rhetoric is not worthless. Some of its technical
Skill is available for better ends. But as other arts, to survive
and progress, must be more than technics, so eSpecially the art
of words cannot go far without being animated by power of con-
ception. Technic is promotive and educative only as it gives
free course to motive and vision. As a system of education,
therefore, sophistic was hollow. This is the issue raised by
Plato; and he is justified by history. SOphistic could use its
many devices only to exhibit skill, not to guide either the state
or the individual. ’-

Thus before us we have pictured a system of rhetoric that was
shallow because it consisted of forms instead of Spirit. Its primary
motive of self- exaltation made sophistic unworthy, and only the new
inspiration emanating from the emerging sect of "the Christians" would

prove sufficiently powerful ultimately to bring regeneration to rhetoric.

 

1lbid., p. 159.
zBaldwin, p. 50.

 

 

 

 

 

it: era 0: me sex;-

‘ u-;p o

,"'“‘-[“ P""""‘.’ 0"

...c‘:.\ H.LAC.CAAL A5-
4

95

Later it will be Shown that while in terms of time Paul belonged

to the era of the second sophistic, his attitudes and practices were

entirely different from what has been delineated in this chapter.

 

 

 

 

urn”.

‘kLn A

r“
1:: even tha‘daht: .
:51: is that it is 1
.:e :ztilizatzan 0:

:zascstle t0 the C-

Of all the It
influential x
thing like 5
Empire. ,

what might
Roman civi
Barbar
zation unai
through WEI
maintained
Of Its COUI‘

1522",

:131th MOIIOd .1

Should an}.
bEen the s

CHAPTER III

SKETCH OF THE LIFE AND INFLUENCE
OF THE APOSTLE PAUL

Paul is a man whom it is impossible to ignore. Whether we
conceive of him as a deluded fanatic or as a saint makes no difference,
for every thoughtful man must confess that his own immediate environ-
ment is what it is in some reSpects because of Pauline influences.

The civilization of the West would be entirely different had there been
no apostle to the Gentiles.

Wrote Sir William Mitchell Ramsay; one of the most brilliant
scholars of classical learning:

Of all the men of the first century, incomparably the most
influential was the Apostle Paul. No one man exercised any-
thing like so much power as he did in molding the future of the
Empire. . . . Had it not been for Pau1--if one may guess at
what might have been--no man would now remember Greek and
Roman civilization.

Barbarism proved too powerful for the Graeco-Roman civili-
zation unaided by the new religious bond; and every channel
through which that civilization was preserved, or interest in it
maintained, either is now or has been in some essential part
of its course Christian after the Pauline form. 1

Adolphe Monod in his French lectures gave the following Opinion:

Should any one ask me to name the man who of all others has
been the greatest benefactor of our race, I should say without

 

1William M. Ramsay, Pauline and Other Studies, pp. 53, 100,
cited by Wilbur M. Smith, Therefore Stand (Boston: W. A. Wilde Co. ,
1945), pp. 246-247.

 

 

96

..‘1‘ : :rt
1:; not all “M a:

. I
HY ' . “ l
-cruent' *6 Che

Q

T1 was th res;

. ~n “0:16 1':
Roman

‘ .

. , ' Y‘a’

Onent by D. we

Ouuewt Tn ...".1'
on “ . ‘

N
to the present

One half 0

:5 friend Luke m3

. ‘I '7‘
.33: the apostle t

«l

izence on civiliz.
lie: written about

listory, Christ

indebted to him
his of genius u”:

"-3? 3% Augu

6‘. _
S tint

k

#333 near Milan

:;;.‘y'r

Beside hit:

\- 4118, Augustin

 

 

97

hesitation the Apostle Paul. His name is the type of human
activity the most endless, and at the same time the most use-
ful, that history has cared to preserve. 1

 

While not all will agree with Monod, it is impossible to dispute Stalker's
statement: "We owe to him hundreds of ideas which were never uttered
before. "7- Kuist's following declaration is also undeniably factual.

It was the result of his extensive teaching-travels throughout the
Roman world that a Jewish sect became a world religion. His
work was so important that some have even called him the second
founder of the Christian church. He united the Occident and the
Orient by bringing to Europe a religion which originated in the
Orient. In this one way he predetermined the history of EurOpe
to the present day.3

 

One half of the most influential book in the world, the New Testa-
ment, owes its origin to Paul. He himself wrote a quarter of it, and
his friend Luke wrote another quarter providing the only information
about the apostle that we have outside of the Epistles. Nor does his
influence on civilization stop with the New Testament. .More books have
been written about this man and his ideas than about any other character
in history, Christ excepted. In yet another way the world's literature
is indebted to him because he was the Spark which kindled many later
minds of genius who subsequently influenced Western culture. In the
year 396 Augustine, with troubled mind and heart, was walking in a
garden near Milan when he heard the voice of a child singing "Take,
read'." Beside him was a copy of Paul's letter to the Romans. On Open-

ing this, Augustine's eye fell on a passage so appr0priate to his present

1Adolphe Monod, Lucile ou La Lecture de la Bible, cited by
Howard Tillman Kuist, The Pedagogy of St. Paul (New York: George
H. Doran Company, 1925), p. 136.

zJames Stalker, The Life of St. Paul (New York: Fleming H.
Revell Company, n.d.), p. 93.

 

 

 

3Kuist, p. 141.

 

F)

1::sirxilar to that
re: two hundred b

gated into one of l

. it
mine an

:75: the field pr (3

‘: lulque Chara.

1‘
1.. Abram it
“er, 1928);

98

condition and mood that his whole life was thereupon changed. There
are millions today who believe that the new Augustine became an
incalculable blessing to the whole Christian world.

In a monastery cell centuries later, a miner's son turned priest
read the same letter of Paul's. According to the historian Lindsay:
"It was this contact with the Unseen [through the Epistle of St. Paul]
which fitted Luther for his task as the leader of men in an age which
was longing for a revival of moral living inspired by a fresh religious
impulse. "1

John Wesley, the man who saved England from a bloody revolu-
tion similar to that in France, the founder of Methodism and author of
over two hundred books, found his way to service as a result of insight
gained into one of Paul's major concepts. Wesley wrote as follows
concerning this experience.

In the evening I went very unwillingly to a society in
Aldersgate, where one was reading Luther's Preface to
the Epistle to the Romans. About a quarter before nine, while
he was describing the change which God works in the heart
through faith in Christ, I felt my heart strangely warmed.
I felt I did trust in Christ, Christ alone, for salvation, and an
assurance was given me that He had taken away my sins, even
mine, and saved me from the law of sin and death—.”2

 

Even the field preaching of Methodism found its Spur in the example of
the ancient Apostle.3
In;the field of oratory and rhetorical criticism the influence of

this unique character has been no less marked. Every volume or set

1Thomas M. Lindsay, A History of the Reformation, 2 vols.
(New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1928), Vol. I, p. 204.

 

ZThe Journal of the Rev. John Wesley, A.M. , Nehemiah Curnoch
(ed.) 8 vols. (London: The Epworth Press, 1938), Vol. I, pp. 475-476.

3Abram Lipsky, John Wesley--A Portrait (New York: Simon 81
Schuster, 1928), p. 286.

 

 

 

.;
‘ ”r org.
'7‘1‘2165 ,3“?

fireon, Beecher
Tiers would imp-'3'
-1 ' ‘ }_-
niltbls be t .e c
Tilerfarce, Brzg
Eient artzcles 1r.

:1: employed by

he-A.

.....‘Lasm. Thi

(I)

:eiugrnented by

tan endeavour
By Chrys 3:

iii: more rec 6

When he s;
quickens u

99

of volumes purporting to represent in some way the world‘ 3 great
orators lists an impressive number of Speakers who as preachers,
or as social reformers, have taken their cue from the Jew of Tarsus.
To erase from the records of eloquence such names as Chrysostom,
Origen, Ambrose, Augustine, Bernard, Wycliffe, Latimer, Knox,
Luther, Calvin, Bossuet, Bourdaloue, Fenelon, Baxter, Wesley,
Spurgeon, Beecher, Brooks, Talmadge, Fulton Sheen, and countless
others would impoverish the history of oratory; but how much more
would this be the case were the names of secular speakers like
Wilberforce, Bright, and William Jennings Bryan also to vanish'.
Recent articles in speech journals testify that the Pauline values are
still employed by many as measuring rods in certain areas of speech
criticism. This brief allusion to Paul's influence upon rhetoric could
be augmented by similar allusions to his influence in most fields of
human endeavour.

By Chrysostom, Paul was called ”The Heart of the World. "
A far more recent writer has asserted similarly.

When he speaks to us, mysterious powers awaken in us. He
quickens us, kindles us, arouses us to aspire and dream.

We have to reckon with him as a world force. He is a potent
factor in social evolution. He is one of the determining in-
fluences in our Western civilization. The prints of his fingers
are on our institutions. His ethical ideals stand in the market—
place. His ideas are running in our blood. He has woven him-
self into the fiber of our consciences and conduct. We are
influenced by him even when we are least conscious of him.

. . . The whole world would to-day be different had Saul of
Tarsus never lived.1

We turn now to a brief sketch of Paul's life. The discussion of
those elements in his early years which particularly shaped his

oratory is reserved for a separate chapter. For the story of this life

 

1C. E. Jefferson, The Character of Paul (New York- Macmillan,
1923), p. 375.

 

7 ,_._,_ .,

 

u;

.-~

 

 

My

 

1;!

, o

“-n

 

~.
4‘
4. .

f r’

100

the only major sources available are the Epistles and the book of
Acts, and the following reconstruction is based upon the information
in these.

Tarsus of Cilicia, at the eastern boundary of the Mediterranean,
was the birthplace of Saul the Jew. Probably he received his Gentile
name of Paul simultaneously with his Hebrew patronymic. The occasion
preceded the birth of Christ by about a year. In all likelihood, the
Roman citizenship inherited from his father had its origin at the time
of special services to the State by some of his ancestry. Judging from
the accounts of historians of the day, not all the citizens of Tarsus had
the same privilege. While this city was a rival of Athens and Alexandria
as regards education, there is no evidence that Paul Spent any signifi-
cant period attending the university of the Gentiles.

To his birth and early residence in Tarsus may be traced the
urbanity which the apostle at no time laid aside, and of which
he was frequently a perfect model, many insinuating turns
which he gives to his epistles, and a more skilful use of the
Greek tongue than a Jew born and educated in Palestine could
well have attained. 1

Paul's education came chiefly from Jewish sources. First, he
was trained in the home for about six years; and then he began to attend
the school of the local synagogue. During these years preceding his
teens, Paul was instructed in the trade of tentmaker not because his
parents were in poor circumstances but because it was Jewish custom
that every boy should learn practical skills by which he could support
himself if necessary.

At the commencement of his teens, the boy journeyed to Jerusalem
literally to sit at the feet of the Rabbi Gamaliel (Acts 22: 3). His

instructor was later ranked among the seven greatest teachers of Israel.

 

1"Paul, .. Cyc10paedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical
Literature, lst ed. Vol. VII (eds.) John McClintock and James Strong
(New York: Harper 81 Brothers, Publishers, 1877),- 10 Vols. and 2

supplementary vols .

 

 

 

#L W L

 

 

 

kH‘

 

 

‘4-

 

~_

 

 

 

 

101

While personally tolerant and candid and well acquainted with Greek
literature, Gamaliel remained an ardent Pharisee. Thus Paul could
claim that he had been "taught according to the perfect manner of the
law of the fathers" (Acts 22:3). Scripture and tradition were his
lesson books augmented by the parabolic ritual of the temple. Possibly
at this time began the moral struggles characteristic of any earnest
Jew who found his natural mind and heart at enmity with the strict
moral requirements of the Torah.

The New Testament makes its first mention of Paul when it
notes that he was a witness of the martyrdom of Stephen. On that
occasion he held the clothes of those who threw the stones, and the
historian calls him a neanias --a young man, which probably means
about the age of thirty to thirty-five (Acts 7:58).

His ardent, intolerant nature fitted him for an Inquisitor, and
the next mention of him in Acts depicts him as persecuting the infant
church with all vigour. ”As for Saul, he made havock of the church,
entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them
to prison. ” Acts 8:3. Thus he endeavoured to compensate for the
moral inadequacy experienceiby all who strove to comply with the
multitudinous requirements of the Rabbis.

Expecting to find at Damascus numerous believers in o 8dos--

 

"the way"—-Saul with helpers and authority from the chief priests set
off for that city. Then occurred the crisis of his exPerience resulting
in the persecutor's becoming apostle. The favorite of the Sanhedrin
henceforward was to be the chief object of Jewish hatred. In three
places in Acts, Luke tells the story of the transformation, twice using
the testimony of Paul as given before his captors. While men may
differ in their interpretation of what actually happened on the Damascus

road, one thing is certain. Paul himself believed he saw a vision of

the risen Christ entrusting him with a commission of the Gospel to all

 

 

 

 

- .

 

 

 

 

 

102

the world. If he was deluded in this, we must attribute to coincidence
the strange conformity of his later history and achievements to the
message he believed Christ gave him that day. It is hardly sufficient
to say that Luke invented the story, for most fabricators would have
been far more careful to make the three accounts apparently harmonious
in every detail. It is the very carelessness of the chronicler in this
regard that suggests the honesty of his narration. Certainly the phenome—
non of the Epistles requires a cause which if not identical with that
given in Acts, must be yet as miraculous.

Luke continues his story by saying that the blinded pharisee
was led by the hand to the house of one of those whom he had planned
to persecute. Upon his host's praying for him, the new convert found
his sight restored and heard from Ananias the words: "The God of our
fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see
the Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth. For thou shalt
be his witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard. " (Acts 22:14).

Every word in this address strikes some chord which we hear
sounded again and again in Paul' s Epistles. The new convert
is not, as it is so common to say, converted from Judaism to
Christianity--the God of the Jewish fathers chooses him.

He is chosen to know God's will. That will is manifested in the
Righteous One. Him Saul sees and hears, in order that he may
be a witness of him to all men. The eternal will of the God of
Abraham; that will revealed in a righteous Son of God; the testi-
mony concerning him, a Gospel to mankind--these are the
essentially Pauline principles which are declared in all the
teaching of the apostle, and illustrated in all his actions. 1

 

 

 

 

Paul was baptized, broke his three days' fast, and began to preach in
the synagogues that the expected Messiah had arrived in the person of
Jesus Christ. The greater part of the succeeding three years was spent
in Arabia in a period of seclusion and study characteristic of the pre-

paratory work of many Biblical figures.

 

lMcClintock and Strong, Art. Paul.

 

 

 

 

 

I...

4|»
.>l

\.

...

 

 

.
‘u.
. .
‘.
. A
'.
v
-.
u.
\-
r'
.‘.

 

 

103

His Damascus preaching was resumed after this period until "the Jews
took counsel to kill him” (Acts 9:23). Learning of the plot to murder
Paul, the local Christians supervised his escape over the city wall in
a basket.

Arriving at Jerusalem, he found that the leading clergy were
suspicious of him because of his prior reputation. Barnabas became
his Sponsor, relating the news from Damascus to his cautious fellow-
labourers. Paul's preaching at the capital had an effect similar to that
at Damascus and once more he fled. In his home city of Tarsus he pro-
claimed his message until Barnabas arrived, suggesting that together
they should preach at Antioch, where a great number had been converted
to the faith. In this group Gentiles predominated, and possibly at this
time Paul began to consider future plans for proclaiming to these non-
Jews the message his own countrymen were rejecting. After a little
more than a year, Paul was “ordained" and sent forth with Barnabas
on a Gentile mission with the blessing of the local church leaders, who
believed that the Holy Spirit had decreed the planned advance. This
was the first of the three missionary journeys of Paul which are
described at length in the book of Acts.

On this occasion Cyprus was first visited, and here Sergius Paulus,
the pro-consul was converted. Next they preached throughout Pisidia
and Lycaonia. The cities of Antioch (not to be confused with the Antioch
of Cilicia), Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe heard the earnest voices of
the Jewish preachers. The record declares that in one city the people
called Paul "Mercurius, because he was the chief Speaker. " While the
earlier chapters of Acts spoke of ”Barnabas and Paul, " following the
latter's ordination the order is reversed; and it is "Paul and Barnabas"

henceforward. The usual pattern of events in each community con-

Sisted of either a riot or revival as the result of the new preaching.

 

 

 

104

Some scholars place next in Paul's history the Jerusalem council
described in Acts 15. On this occasion it was decided once and for all
that the requirements of the ceremonial law should not be laid upon
Gentile converts. It was also agreed that while Peter Should lead in
the work among the Jews, Paul was to be the missionary to the Gentiles.

In his second tour the Apostle was accompanied by Silas, and
Timothy joined him at Lystra. The converts in Eastern Asia Minor
were revisited and churches established in Galatia and Phrygia. At Troas
he received the famous Macedonian call and crossed to Europe.

In Philippi a church was planted which remained the most loyal of all to
Paul throughout the remainder of his career and to which he wrote the
New Testament letter bearing their name. Following his imprisonment
at Philippi he preached at Thessalonica, which was the chief city of
Macedonia. Renewed persecution drove him to Athens, where he debated
with Stoics and Epicureans and gave the address from Mars Hill. The
following eighteen months were spent at Corinth, the rich, prOSperous
city which had arisen from its ruins. Probably it was from there

that he wrote his two epistles to the Church at Thessalonica. A short
stay at Ephesus climaxed this second tour; and he returned to Antioch
his headquarters, via Caesarea and Jerusalem. Not for long, however,
did he interrupt his travels. Taking the land route for the commence-
ment of his third tour, he crossed Asia Minor to Ephesus, where he
laboured for nearly two years. The letter to the Galatians had its birth
here, and likewise the first epistle to the Corinthians. From Ephesus
he went to Philippi and a subsequent three months stay in Greece during
which he sent his famous letter to the Romans. His desire was to be

at Jerusalem for the feast of Pentecost. Thus he decided to sail by
Ephesus and bid farewell to the elders of that church during a brief

stOp at Miletus.

 

 

—__

L
_

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

105

The Jerusalem visit was the beginning of the end for Paul. In
his anxiety to be "all things to all men” so far as loyalty to Christ
permitted, he ventured into the temple to demonstrate that he had no
prejudices against the laws of Moses. A mob was roused against him,
and he would have died on the spot had not Roman soldiers intervened.
For two years he was held at Caesarea and then embarked for Rome as
the result of his appeal to Caesar.

In Acts 27 we have the most famous account of any ancient ship-
wreck, as Luke describes Paul's being cast ashore on the island of
Malta. On arrival in Italy he was cheered by an escort of enthusiastic
Christians en route to Rome. His ambition to preach at the heart of
the Empire was on the eve of its fulfilment but in a different fashion
from that he had conceived. While under the surveillance of the
Praetorian guard, he was allowed to teach in his own hired rooms all
who wished to visit him. Even some from among "Caesar's household"
became his converts.

During this period he dictated his messages to the Ephesians,
the Colossians, and the Philippians, and to Philemon. The Pastoral
Epistles--I and II Timothy and Titus—-suggest that Paul was released
at his first trial. Most scholars believe that he visited Macedonia again
and Asia Minor twice. It is even possible that he journeyed as far as
Spain. We are not told the circumstances leading to his second im-
prisonment; but about the year 67 A. D. he was martyred, probably by
beheading at Nero's command.

Shortly after his death the temples of Rome and of Jerusalem, the
Capitoline Jupiter, and the sanctuary on Mount Zion, were destroyed;
"as if to signalize the death of the hero of the faith, who had smitten

with a fatal blow the stupendous fabrics of Gentile and Jewish worship. "1

 

1George P. Fisher, History of the Christian Church (London:
Hodder 81 Stoughton, 1887), p. 30.

106

No man living in that age stands on so high a plane, intellect-
ually and morally, as the Apostle Paul. No fact in the history
of that period is more sublime than the unfaltering constancy
of his faith. 1

 

llbid. , p. 29.

ELEMENTS ‘

‘ .— a
Lafillltn (1:
25:31: regard”. ‘
_ -

.n‘

l

stair an enquiTB‘
grader, temper

These influe
L26 training and
;':.e Torah and J
:::of learning a
Ezla‘n'necl overto-
l'iing and style

First of all
iiershe‘lm's Cha'
517-est in part it

Excitable,
parable, p,

.'-
.....

 

CHAPTER IV

ELEMENTS WHICH SHAPED THE ORATORY OF PAUL

Inasmuch as all oratory reflects to some degree the orator, the
question regarding the elements which shaped the oratory of Paul is
actually an enquiry into the formative influences reSponsible for the
character, temperament, and peculiar genius of Paul.

These influences mainly consist of his natural inheritance, the
home training and city environment of Tarsus, the continued education
in the Torah and Jewish traditions at Jerusalem, the practical instruc-
tion of learning a trade, and most of all the climactic experience which
he claimed overtook him on the Damascus road. Every phase of Paul's
thinking and style can be traced to one or more of these influences.

First of all he was born ”a Hebrew of the Hebrews. " To read
Edersheim's characterization of this "peculiar people" is to understand
at least in part what this involved.

Excitable, impulsive, quick, sharp-witted, imaginative; fond of
parable, pithy sayings, acute distinctions or pungent wit;

reverent towards God and man, reSpectful in the presence of age,
enthusiastic of learning and of superior mental endowments, most
delicately sensitive in regard to the feelings of others; zealous,
with intensely warm Eastern natures, ready to have each prejudice
aroused, hasty and violent in passion but quickly assuaged. 1

Such was Paul by inheritance. He was born into a family of the Pharisees
about a year or two before the birth of Christ. The Pharisees "deSpite

too frequent intolerance and traditionalism, comprehended most that

 

lEdersheim, Sketches of Jewish Social Life in the Days of Christ,
p. 89, quoted by Kuist, p. 22.

 

107

V\<

 

:11: at his birth
iii, the Hebrew
:ezei their only
isms he had or.

Silt name by W:

35201t01d, bu-
5:35.111 Rome‘s
2’90” of the
‘3 Jews belie
The mod
authOritV
wistm ;

miding to t:
"‘Q'nCise his
his

The Cl:

T‘sh 1"itual.

r-
l

was godly and all that was patriotic in the later Judaism. "1 Probably
it was at his birth that the names of Saul and Paul were given him.
Saul, the Hebrew name, means ”asked for, " and possibly the parents
viewed their only son as an answer to prayer. The New Testament
tells us he had one sister but no other children are mentioned. "Paul"
is the name by which he would be known among the Gentiles. "Paulus"

is Roman rather than Greek and signifies "little. " Possibly from

infancy he was small in physical form, but centuries later one Chrysostom

was to describe him by saying "Three cubits in stature, he touched the
sky. " Apparently he did not possess the kind of physique advantageous
to a public figure, but this very drawback may have acted as a spur to
his early ambitions. How Paul‘s father came by Roman citizenship we
are not told, but the extension of the franchise was not uncommon to
some in Rome's conquered lands. This part of his inheritance opened
the doors of the whole Roman world to Paul.

The significance of Paul's early years cannot be overestimated.
The Jews believed that the home stood supreme as an educational
institution. This is apparent in Paul's later writings. (Cf Eph 5:22-33;
6:1-4; Col 3:18-20)

The modern Rousseauian theory that parents must win their
authority over their offSpring by the superiority of parental
wisdom and goodness found no place in Hebrew thought. On
the contrary, parents ruled by divine right.z

According to the Talmud the primary duties of the father were to
circumcise his son, teach him the Torah, and have him instructed in a
trade. The child's curiosity was constantly aroused by some phase of

Jewish ritual, and his questions were answered by narratives from

 

1David Smith, The Life and Letters of St. Paul (New York:
Harper and Brothers, n.d.), p. 21.

 

2F. H. Smith, Education in Ancient Israel from Earliest Times
to 70 A.D. , cited by Kuist, p. 31.

 

I'll I‘

108

 

 

u
'\

109

sacred history. Object lessons were found in the pathway of everyday
duties, and at set seasons of the year such as Passover and Pentecost
the symbolic instruction was multiplied.

»Pervaded by a continuous sense of the reality, holiness, purity,
and graciousness of Jehovah in the manner and atmosPhere of
his home life, the child's religious consciousness was awakened,
stimulated, and nurtured. 1

From the dawn of understanding Jewish children were taught to memorize
the sacred precepts until these were engraved upon the heart. This
immersion in the Scriptures continued at the elementary school attached
to the local synagogue where the child was sent at the age of seven and
later still when he sat at the feet of some learned Rabbi if, like Paul,
he was sent to the holy city.

This concentration upon the Old Testament is one of the most
evident influences upon Paul traceable in his oratory and writings.
In his epistles alone he quotes from the Old Testament over ninety—five
times (excluding quotations in Hebrews) and makes references to these
same writings on about half as many occasions. Such results were
inevitable when we recall that his race believed that one who could not
read was no true Jew and consequently the Old Testament was used as
the spelling book in hundreds of synagogues and schools throughout the
whole Roman empire.

We need to recall the pedagogical and rhetorical elements of the
Hebrew Scriptures if we are rightly to trace their influence on the
Apostle to the Gentiles. First there is Moses, who according to Laurie

in his Pre-Christian Education2 was the greatest of schoolmasters.

 

Paul quotes from, or refers to, Moses twenty-five times. He was aware

that Moses had been an orator par excellence. How often he had read

 

1Kuist, p. 33.

2S. S. Laurie, Historical Survey of Pre-Christian Education, p. 66,
cited by Kuist, p. 24.

110

the seven sermons from the mount given by Moses and recorded in
Deuteronomy'. He would have observed that this first of Israel's
preachers had a personality which actually radiated the truth of his
messages (Ex 34:27-35). Furthermore Moses had taught by the power
of example (Num 12:3, 7; Heb 3:2, 5) as well as by word, symbol,
command, and act (Ex 19:1-6; Deut 1:1, 9-17; Ex 7:8-13; Ex 14:10-31;
Ex 15: 1-18).

Also in the Old Testament he found some that taught by an appeal
to the feelings primarily. These were the Priests with their significant
linen robes, grave demeanour, and colourful symbolic ceremonies.

From the Psalmists with their sublimity and tenderness Paul
"was prepared to teach the 'universal language of religious emotion. "'1

Most of all the PrOphets contributed to his ideal.

They were the masters of the art of persuasive speech. They
faced the task of opening blind eyes and deaf ears to the per-
ception of truth. Theirs was the mission to impel weak wills

to right living. They rubbed shoulders with their fellows and
knew and understood them. They knew how to teach. They

won attention not only because their enthusiasm was contagious
but because they called for and expected it. They introduced
their lessons with: "Ho'. " "Come near'. " "Hear ye! " "Behold'. "
”Listen'. " ”Awake, awake'. " "Arise, shine'."' (Isa 29: 1:55: 1; 34: 1;
1:10; 44:1; 46:3; 48:1, 12; Jer 2:4; Isa 24:1; 32:1; 42:1; 59:1, etc;
49: 1; 51:9, 17, etc. 52: 1; 60:1). They utilized likely occasions

to impart truth. (Jer 7:1-7; 20: 1-6; 26:1-7.) They found points
of contact in their immediate circumstances. (Eze 24:15-18).
They chose concrete illustrations from life all about them, from
nature (Jer 8:7; 12:8-10; 13:23; 14:2-6) and from history (Micah
7:18-20; Hosea 11:1-4). They used pointed questions to probe
sluggish minds (Isa 40:6, 12, 27, 28; 53:1 etc. ). They proceeded
from the known to the unknown (Ia 28:23-29). They used proverbs
(Eze 18:1-4ff; Jer 31:29), parables (Isa 521-7; 27:2-6; Eze 17:1-24;
24:1-5), figures of speech (la 48: 18, 19; Jer 2:13, 17:1 etc), to
accommodate their truth to the understanding of their hearers.
They employed visions (Jer 1:11, 12, 13ff; 24:1-10; Eze 1, 2, 37: 1-14

 

'Kuist, p. 26.

 

 

 

l‘fi

 

 

 

their “'er

210W with

This leng:
1113215 Char“ Ct
liraC'el‘iStic s
a}: ‘ Z
5' Prophets ,

“ fa'fi’liliar wi

111

etc.), symbols (Eze 4:1-4; 19:1-9 etc.), object lessons (Jer 13:
12-14; 18: 1-4ff; 36: 1-8ff; Ezek 4:4ff., 9ff; 5:1ff., 21:1-7), and
dramatic actions (Jer 13: l-7ff., 16:1-4, etc.) to stir the
imagination and touch the conscience. They cast their messages
into acrostics (Lamentations 1-5) and poetic form, choosing the
meter best adapted to their message (Cf Swift, Education in
Ancient Israel, p. 36). They atmosphered all their contacts with
tremendous earnestness (of which 1 Kings 18 is typical). They
met adverse situations with a courage that defied their antagon-
ists (Jer 38:1-13; 21:9, etc.). They spoke not because they had
to say something, but because they had something to say (As C.
Alphonso Smith, What Can Literature Do for Me? New York,
1918, p. 18). They were the spokesmen of Jehovah (Isa 6:6ff.;
Jer 1:17 ff; Amos 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 13; 2: 1,4, 6, etc). They clothed
their words with a ring of authority that made their message
glow with conviction (Isa 44:6, 21; 45:1, 14; 48:17). 1

 

 

 

This lengthy quotation is given because it best summarizes not
only the characteristics of the preaching of the prophets but also the
characteristics of Paul's oratory. Deissmann rightly placed Paul among
the prophets. 2 Like them he sprang from among the common people and
was familiar with daily toil. Like them he faced the task of opening the
blind eyes and deaf ears to the perception of truth. He had a similar
enthusiasm and conviction of divine call, and a compelling earnestness.
It is beyond question that Paul's study of the prophets was one of the
chief elements which shaped his own mesSages.

While at Jerusalem studying under the Rabbi Gamaliel, Paul would
have been subjected not only to the Old Testament but to the vast
accumulation of Jewish lore and wisdom which later became known as

the Talmud.

 

lKuist, pp. 26-27.

2St. Paul, p. 6.

 

The Til-'3"
Iteasures
'1'32116 rfu‘.
andthe if
many \‘31U
-3:k of a
gartance.
by othe :S
of the WOI
Every 36
:ihaman folly

it me from tl

:aitions attei

:aiating fro
‘irire of Ta:
Einade son
ii was fam
ilfe corner:
It language

ilpetent in

’m,

.
\.~

. the 1131111
“L‘s Rome.
Tarsus
tapital of the
lithe peak 0
iamile ire

l

‘9'1808

112

The Talmud, that great written museum containing untold
treasures of a civilized world of six bygone centuries, that
wonderful and universal encyclopaedia, which with the Mishna
and the Midrash which follow in its train, presents twice as
many volumes as the Encyclopaedia Brittanica . . . Not the
work of a few individuals, but a work of great scientific im-
portance. It is a work by the whole Jewish nation, as well as
by others who indirectly contributed to that remarkable gazette

of the world. . . .1
Every Gentile reader of the Talmud knows it to be a monument

of human folly as well as a storehouse of truth. Apparently Paul sifted

the one from the other for we do not find him citing from the Jewish

traditions after the manner of the Rabbis of his day. Nevertheless

there are areas in Paul's arguments which reflect the rabbinical mode
of discussion.

So far the influences we have been considering have been those
Also to be considered is the Graeco-Roman

emanating from Judaism.

culture- of Tarsus upon Paul. It should be remembered that this culture

had made some impingement even upon Judaism. For example while
Paul was familiar with the Scriptures in the Hebrew language, he was
mOre conversant with the Greek translation known as the Septuagint.
The language of his infancy was Koiné Greek, although he was also
competent in handling the vernacular Aramaic of Palestine. Paul was
thus the native of a city mainly Greek in pOpulation and incorporated
with Rome.
Tarsus is called by Paul ”no mean city. " It was the western
capital of the united province of Syria-Cilicia, and- in Paul's day it was
at the peak of its fame and prosPerity. Situated only three-quarters

of a mile from the sea, it enjoyed lucrative commerce through her port

at the mouth of the river on which the main city was situated.

lIrnber, U. S. Commissioner of Education Report, 1894-95, Vol.
II, p. 1808, cited by Kuist, p. 29.

 

‘
I x

 

gating to I):

1:316 Strabo--
”A f: -, 1"
U .eep;y
that they
place the

 

 

 

113

According to Dr. David Smith "she was at that period the world's
principal seat of learning!‘ He quotes the geographer Strabo to this
effect, as does almost every commentator on the early life of Paul.
Wrote Strabo--

So deeply are the people there imbued with zeal for philosophy
that they have surpassed Athens and Alexandria and every other
place that can be mentioned.

And Smith adds--

And she possessed this proud distinction which Alexandria alone
shared--thathersavants were all natives. Students flocked to
her schools from other lands, but she had no need of alien
teachers. On the contrary, she had no room for the multitude
of her learned sons, and she sent them abroad to enlighten the
world. 'Rome eSpecially can learn the multitude of the city's
savants; for she is full of Tarsians and Alexandrians. '1

We naturally ask-—did Paul ever attend the university of Tarsus ?
Did he imbibe through Gentile teachers hellenistic thought? This has
long been debated, but the weight of the evidence today in scholarly
circles suggests that Paul's education was strictly Jewish with no
formal training of length from Gentiles. Admittedly his Rabbi Gamaliel
was almost unique in Jewish circles for his study of the writings of
the Greeks, and admittedly Paul on at least three occasions quotes from
these sources. Nevertheless Paul' S knowledge of the pagan world
and thought came primarily from his mixing with men rather than with
books, and the fragments he quotes from heathen authors- are those
which would have been known to any man in the street regardless of
whether he could read.

Farrar says on this point--

But who that has read St. Paul can believe that he has ever
studied Homer, or Aeschylus, or Sophocles? If he had done so,
would there--in a writer who often "thinks in quotations"--

 

'David Smith, Life and Letters of St. Paul (New York: Harper
and Brothers, n.d.), p. 18.

 

 

 

 

 

 

enerEV 3'13
'13: babe D1

gsne thr 31;
Sophists o
:3: then was 13
:Jgraphers of l
:giined either
:s:rictors of I
Firs-11y, i
;;istle to the C
ii men of all
tend to all.
its the gospel
farlsalem,
But ther
L“: had been t

 

114

have been no touch or trace of any reminiscence of, or allusion
to, epic or tragic poetry in epistles written at Athens and at
Corinth and besides the very tumuli of Ajax and Achilles ? . . .
Nothing can be more clear than that he had never been subjected
to a classic training. . . . It is-rdoubtful whether the incomparable
energy and individuality of his style and of his reasoning would
not have been merely enfeebled and conventionalised if he had
gone through any prolonged course of the only training which the
Sophists of Tarsus could have given him. 1

What then was the main influence of Tarsus upon Paul? Most modern
biographers of Paul who can claim to be scholarly reject the idea that
he gained either literary tastes or the Stoical philosophy from the
instructors of Tarsus. What then remains ?

Firstly, it was his citizenship of Tarsus which gave the future
apostle to the Gentiles his cosmopolitan outlook. He learned to mix
with men of all classes and of all nations, and his sympathies were to
extend to all. It was peculiarly fitting that this man who was to communi-
cate the gospel to EurOpe was not born in Palestine, or reared at
Jerusalem.

But there was something else Paul learned from Tarsus. This
city had been the fitting burial place of Julian the apostate. It was

counted by its contemporaries among the tria kappa kahista, i. e. the

 

”three wicked K's" of the day, and these were Kappadokia, Kilikia,
and Krete. (Tarsus being a main metropolis of Cappadocia). Culture
had not brought moral renovation to Tarsus. Instead it was the center
of orgiastic idolatry. Impurity, gluttony, and brutality characterized
the syncretistic worship of the city. Paul would have seen the statue
of Sardanapalus, traditional founder of Tarsus. This figure is repre-
sented as cynically snapping his fingers while uttering the sentiment

inscribed upon its pedestal--"Eat, drink, enjoy thyself; the rest is

 

lFrederic W. Farrar, The Life and Work of St. Paul (London:

 

Cassell and Company, Limited, 1908), pp. 22-23. Henceforward
referred to as St. Paul.

 

 

 

o
.
1' ’P
-‘ LIV
...-n:
. ...-A...
a i

' A
n ”_ ‘
I . H‘:.AC~

:1:an his
15'an there
impelled to
issible fOr t
rifle he lean

:rzgin in Part
lit} .

.\ Lplaces
rllme ”all t]

11.35“. The

~ .

. v
‘Ici‘cl

‘u

and the

 

115

nothing. " The earnest Jewish lad must early have been impressed
that the highest culture, the most thorough education, without a knowl-
edge of God, could not banish the darkness of the soul. He would
realise, from the best that paganism had to offer, man's helplesness
when bereft of divine revelation. Later these convictions were to

find expression in burning words in such passages as Romans 1:22-32.

Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the
glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man
or birds or animals or reptiles. . . .

For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions.
Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the
men likewise. . . .

They were filled with all manner of wickedness, evil,
covetousness, malice. Full of envy, murder, strife, deceit,
malignity, they are gossips, slanderers, haters of God,
insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient
to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. RSV

One cannot help enquiring--What would the future history of the
world have been if this Jewish lad had conformed to the pattern of the
Tarsian majority?

Paul probably laboured at his trade of tent-making in Tarsus
following his years of rabbinical training in Jerusalem. In all liklihood
he was there during the years of Christ's ministry in Palestine. Thus
compelled to join the practical world of men and things it was im-
possible for the Jewish scholar to become a bookish recluse. At his
trade he learned many things that books can never teach. The sober
commonsense so apparent in his counsel to troubled churches owed its
origin in part at least to his intercourse with the Gentiles in the
marketplaces of Tarsus. Here the foundation was laid for him to
become "all things to all men. " This too had its influence on the oratory
of Paul. The Speaker in this instance is one who is also “mighty in

deeds" and the energy of his labours enters into every word he utters.

 

 

The most 5
:::::sic'ere<i. 1
:teir views as
:ghoweyer is
:e:a::e a zealau:

I Q .- .h. “
:ze:1.ng ..cppe.
*

izsion would 11:.
sation of blindne
Tzenajority of
teleast before
tion their frit'
3:5 a historica
tienyiable scl
Pii's conversi
iiinglish and

1‘38 Where 1}.
ins: and Pale
jibloration ;
xii" the ranks

'11:. P311) . Apt

116

The most significant of all factors influencing Paul has yet to
be considered. It is the Damascus road experience. Men will differ
in their views as to exactly what happened on that occasion. One
thing however is certain. The persecutor stopped in his tracks and
became a zealous protagonist of the cause he had so vehemently opposed.
Something happened. A result so tremendous calls for a cause of
similar magnitude. The theory of an epileptic fit is entirely incongruous
with the picture of the hardy missionary described in Acts. An Optical
illusion would have to be powerful indeed to give its witness the sen-
sation of blindness for several days and to revolutionise his thinking.
The majority of mankind would require an event extraordinary to say
the least before they turned their back on their present mode of living
and on their friends to become the hated quarry of an enraged nation.

It is a historical fact that some scholars of unimpeachable character
and enviable scholarship have changed their minds in this matter of
Paul's conversion. Sir William Mitchell Ramsay and Adolf Deissmann,
an English and a German scholar respectively, forsook their arm-
chairs where they had weaved sceptical theories and travelled to Asia
Minor and Palestine to explore the lands of Paul. The results of years
of exploration placed these scholars beyond their original skepticism
and in the ranks of orthodoxy. Both have written learned volumes

upon Paul. Apparently there are still some men of education prepared
to accept Paul's word concerning what happened to him on the Damascus
road.

Whatever happened, the result is clear. Paul believed he had
been confronted bjythe risen Christ and commissioned as a world herald
of the faith he had persecuted. His best friend, a physician, records
the story in three places in his narrative. Here we read what Paul
held to be his divine commission, delivered by One whom his country-

men had murdered.

.I
—

 

lanileSL
1333 you:
aspaint y
you have
dely rin

lseni ya

33356:. Note
715mm the l

These 11‘

" 3f Pseud:
iinflfians-.

Arethe
gr€ater
beating.
the ham
IhaX’e h
Ihare h
Sea; on
robbers
danger-
dangEr

a Sleep:
cold ant

 

 

117

Says Luke's record, quoting Paul's description of the words of the

risen Christ--

I am Jesus whom you are persecuting. But rise and stand

upon your feet; for I have appeared to you for this purpose, to
appoint you to serve and bear witness to the things in which

you have seen me and to those in which I will appear to you,
delivering you from the people and from the Gentiles--to whom
I send you to Open their eyes, that they may turn from darkness
to light and from the power of Satan to God, that they may
receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are
sanctified by faith in me. Acts 26: 15- 18 RSV

Whether we agree or disagree with Paul's version of what happened

to him is not relevant at this juncture. That which is significant is

that the words he quotes do admirably sum up his own subsequent
career. Note certain key words--to serve and bear witness, delivering
you from the people (Jews) and from the Gentiles, that they may turn,
etc. These words summarise the remainder of the life of Paul. No
man served as wholeheartedly as he. Contrasting his ministry with
that of pseudo-apostles he could say in his second address to the
Corinthians - -

Are they servants of Christ? I am a better one . . . with far
greater labors, far more imprisonments, with countless
beatings, and often near death. Five times I have received at
the hands of the Jews the forty lashes less one. Three times

I have been beaten with rods; once I was stoned. Three times
I have been shipwrecked; a night and a day I have been adrift at
sea; on frequent journeys, in dangers from rivers, danger from
robbers, danger from my own people, danger from Gentiles,
danger in the city, danger in the wilderness, danger at sea,
danger from false brethren; in toil and hardship, through many
a sleepless night, in hunger and thirst, often without food, in
cold and exposure. And, apart from other things, there is the
daily pres sure upon me of my anxiety for all the churches.

2 Cor. 11:23-29 RSV

Besides being a superb example of ethos, these words picture how

exactly his life after the Damascus road experience had corresponded

 

...- ...—1'
I—

 

 

s- 115236“

..
_~;.C car»:
”us-'1

This we
res-reed in A
:2 :ratory 05
2:2 definitive
sis-re thr ough
are .10 subjun
ear-tributes
1::‘ept of the
iateloprn ent 1
:areer. Her
the answe:
.Pharisee.

:e::nost mi
Earring to
‘11: have bec
9311 is "a C
£211 news of
1310315 are 1
ing. All h

395 things ~

eternal. H
1:311 that nC

£3715 Our 1.01

g‘ .1
\.:‘y b0 rn

 

 

118

with the forecast there given to him. Indeed he had served and borne
witness, certainly he had stood in constant need of deliverance from
Jewish and Gentile persecution, and just as surely many of his listeners
had turned from their former way of life to the way of Christianity.
Thus we are compelled to recognise in the crisis of Paul's life
recorded in Acts the most important of all the factors which influenced
the oratory of Paul. Whatever that experience was, it left the Apostle
with definitive values, with immovable convictions which henceforward
shone through every sentence he uttered. It has been said that there
are no subjunctive moods with Paul. This is true and the reason may
be attributed to the influence we have just considered. Every major
concept of theApostle which we will trace in his addresses is the
development of the seed that was planted at the turning point of his
career. Hereafter he is a man "in Christ” and this he recognizes to
be the answer to the soul struggles after righteousness he had known as
a Pharisee. Christ is risen indeed, Paul asserts or "we are of all
men most miserable. " And because Christ is risen He will come again
according to His promise to redeem from this life or the grave all
who have become his heirs by simple confiding trust. Therefore he
(Paul) is ”a debtor unto all men" and woe to him if he preach not the
good news of forgiveness of sins and power through Christ. These con—
victions are the doctrines Paul employs to motivate believers to holy
living. All his preaching now becomes that of a man who looks "not
at the things which are seen but at the things which are unseen . . .
the eternal. ” Constantly he reminds his hearers of the tidings entrusted
to him that noonday by Damascus. In 1 Cor. 9:1 he asks"Have I not seen
Jesus our Lord?" In 1 Cor 15:8 when he lists the appearances of the
risen Jesus to his followers he adds: ”And last of all as to one un-
timely born, he appeared also to me. " In Rom 1:15 he declares that

his apostleship was granted by Jesus Christ Himself and in Phil 3:12

 

II.

119

with a graphic metaphor he declares that he "was laid hold on by
Christ Jesus" as a prize is grasped by a victorious athlete. This

assurance is the mainsPring of the Apostle's untiring service and of

his eloquent ambas sador ship.

 

 

The orese
thigh: of the '
:‘ie Introduct

H 31:“
22:0 3 phD;.L

-- imans ne~

:fscme occasi
Fi‘iines, Rom
."ze other crits
151531115th c
51.16 Gentiles
iz-Lassians ha
’13 attribute
ififlldiscour
lilatians, Ph
hlthe fc
iiorder of t]

fiéarding the
:1: Galatians .
Ti 16h the We

1;:d

N‘ has 80m

.1 an e‘vjdEnt

CHAPTER V

THE CRITICAL ANALYSES OF SEVEN
PAULINE DISCOURSES

The present chapter considers the major addresses of Paul in
the light of the classical approach to rhetorical theory. As mentioned
in the Introduction, every epistle which had its origin in a situation
akin to a public Speaking setting is considered. Thus the epistle to
the Romans has been omitted because it did not arise from the urgency
of some occasion that called for persuasion. Unlike the other
Paulines, Romans is more in the nature of an essay than a Speech.

The other criterion applied in selecting epistles for analysis was that
they must be ones generally accepted as originating with the Apostle
to the Gentiles. On this ground, for example, neither Ephesians or
Colossians has been included, for there are some prominent scholars
who attribute them to authorship other than Paul's. We are left with
seven discourses--l and 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Corinthians,
Galatians, Philippians, and Philemon.

In the following section, these seven epistles are analyzed in
the order of their composition. General uniformity of opinion exists
regarding the sequence of these letters with the exception of the dating
for Galatians. In this particular case, we have placed the letter where
we felt the weight of scholarship indicated. This chronological arrange-
ment has some significance for the student of Paul's rhetoric as there

is an evident increasing complexity of subject matter as one moves

120

 

 

 

 

I
:éserxares a.
:irsh at Cor;
2;: same chm

Piiiwians we

(4

.. V -
Jl’h in:

:e least com}

u: also C0312

il‘a'ed in p!

Ffesentation
:V-zilate s .

respon

An anaj

12.1

from the earliest letters to the later. Problems began to thicken

about the infant church as it grew, and these suggested the themes

for Paul's messages to the churches. Thus 1 and 2. Thessalonians

are relatively simple in substance, but the next letters confront us

with increased involvement. Paul's life-long Opponents, the Judaizers,

whose purpose it was to lure the Christians back to the external

Observances of Judaism, figure as the particular threat to the young

church at Corinth. By the time Galatians is written, it would seem

that some churches were almost submerged by this heresy, while in

Philippians we are confronted only with the echo of the Spent controversy.
With the exception of Philemon, the two letters to the Thessalonians

are the Shortest of the seven, and, as has been indicated, they are also

the least complex. For this reason their analyses, herein presented,

are also comparatively brief, and a simplified procedure has been

followed in presenting a report of their study in the light of the classical

canons. Beginning with 1 Corinthians, however, the procedure of

presentation has been according to the following sub-headings, or their

cognates.

A survey of the occasion, indicating the particular problems
re3ponsible for the preparing of the message.

An analysis of the development of ideas, with emphasis upon
logical proof.

An examination of pathetic proof. 1

An examination of ethical proof.

An analysis of arrangement.

A statement of results.

It will be noted that in this chapter the canons of Style, Memory,

and Delivery have not been considered. Obviously the epistles can

 

1See footnote on page 220 for statement regarding motive and
emotional appeals.

 

=2

lL‘
.1
C)
H

\/
0

ea c v . “15.-E
5.5;?) Oct
‘0; c 1
Lil: $33-5.
‘ ' ' 2' lo
‘21. ensajnhl

- r
. e ‘
'fftr‘ue: *0.

5 iiStinct i;
15 Clncerne:
‘Efiation in
$336131 cha3

In QVa
rei‘lelltly t]
:33 0f spee.
71m in 1h
{lire it is c

iparticular

122

afford us little help as regards the canon last named. 1 A discussion
of Memory is omitted in harmony with current practice. Neither
Aristotle's Rhetoric, nor the major rhetorical works from the eighteenth
century onwards, give consideration to this canon. Furthermore
it is impossible to prove from the epistles alone the extent to which
Paul exhibited the ideal of this canon. The consideration of Style is
reserved for a separate chapter inasmuch as the style does not greatly
differ in essentials in the various epistles with the exception of
Philemon. The last-named letter is the only one of the seven which is
even semi-personal. While addressed to the small church that met at
the home of Philemon, it is the slave owner himself to whom Paul
chiefly Speaks. The peculiar nature of the problem required tact more
than authority, and thus we find Paul expressing himself in a style that
is distinct in some features as far as the entire corpus of his addresses
is concerned. To preserve uniformity of method, the discussion of this
variation in style manifested in Philemon is also preserved for the
general chapter on that canon.

In evaluating the rhetoric of Paul, we have chosen to employ most
frequently the criteria presented by Thonssen and Baird in their
§Eech Criticism. It is felt that this volume affords an adequate expres-
Sion of speech rationale which is representative also of most modern
Opinion in this field. Occasionally other writers on rhetoric are cited
Where it is considered that their words are the more illuminating in

a particular instanc e .

 

1The statement by Paul's enemies regarding his delivery is con-
sidered on pages 216-217.

 

 

 

‘V.

1 i
the bret‘n

. c
in the 3'.)
a

patter; C

The firs
2;:culated we.
mien: Salami

Thessa'

vvvv

"'3." It was
:-:::h-we ste :-
33 Was 31$
TJrld. A m
lithe Adria:

The c}.

 

123

I. FIRST DISCOURSE TO THE CHRISTIANS
AT THESSALONICA

"I adjure you by the Lord that this letter be read to all
the brethren. " 1 Thessalonians 5:27 RSV

This Epistle was the first Epistle written by St. Paul;

and the precept he gives here, that 1:11—12 Epistle should be read

in the public assemblies of the Church, is a specimen and

pattern of what was to be done with all his Epistles. They were
addressed (for the most part) 3131: to private or particular

persons, but to large public Societies, to Churches. 1

The first portion of the New Testament to be transcribed and
circulated was first delivered as a public address to Christians in
ancient Salonika.

Thessalonica, like Tarsus the birthplace of Paul, was "no mean
city. " It was the capital of the province of Macedonia. Situated at the
north-western angle of the archipelago of the Aegean Sea, this great
port was also one of the largest commercial emporiums in the Roman
world. A military road, the Via Egnatia, connected it with the shores
of the Adriatic and Italy on the west, and with Asia on the east.

The church at Thessalonica had been raised up by Paul about
A.D. 51. According to Acts 17:1-9 the Apostle had preached in the
city for several weeks while simultaneously laboring night and day,
working with his own hands at his trade of tent-making to support him-
self. The Jews of the city bribed ”certain lewd fellows of the baser
sort” to assault the house of the missionaries. Paul escaped, leaving
Timothy to teach the new converts who were mainly Gentiles. Two
years later, news came to the Apostle at Corinth concerning the

believers at Thessalonica. On the whole the report was favorable.

 

1Christopher Wordsworth, The New Testament of Our Lord and
Saviour Jesus Christ. In the Original Greek with Introductions and
Notes. 2 Vols. (London: Rivingtons, 1872), Vol. II, 23.

 

 

 

1
v .h
- Av—Hn I ,
“r .Cmd l o". 5“
s n

v

Wives some

I”; and 1min g I

#1535 and Pat”:
\ x
\
Oratory
in the af:
filming t
Effort to
Speech c
on the ba
germinal
23m any Other
:35 library m
3.5 birth 0f Pau

as Stalker c o

 

124 // 5’

According to Timothy the church abounded in faith and love. A few,
however, had lapsed into the old Sins against chastity and sobriety.
The chief problem in the church was one which could not be solved
by removing the primary cause. Dying members left their living
relatives somewhat bewildered, wondering whether the former had
accepted the gOSpel in vain. They had hoped that Christ' 3 return would
be almost immediate, but now as He tarried, His followers were dying.
Death, then as now, to many appeared so permanent.

To meet the challenge of this perplexity is Paul's main objective
in his message to the Thessalonians. He must persuade them that
there is no necessity for despair and that their present course of faith—

ful and loving endeavour should not be abandoned.

Logos and Pathos in I Thessalonians

 

Oratory to be great must deal with ideas which make a difference
in the affairs of men and states. 1

Human values can be talked about only as consisting of attitudes
moving through qualitative changes in historical continuity. The
effort to comprehend this "history of ideas" is at the center of
Speech criticism for rhetorical adaptation can be understood only
on the basis of an adequate historical perSpective of these
germinal values. 2

More books have been written about Paul and his concepts than
about any other figure in history, Christ excepted. Harvard alone houses
in its library more than one book for every year that has passed since
the birth of Paul until now about this unique character and his ideas.

Thus Stalker could go so far as to affirm that Paul is ”the greatest

thinker of his age, if not of any age, "3 and also "We owe to him

 

lThonssen and Baird, p. 332.

‘P‘A. J. Croft, "The Functions of Rhetorical Criticism" Quarterly
Journal of Speech, Vol. XLII (October 1956), p. 288.

 

3James Stalker, The Life of St. Paul (New York: Fleming H.
Revell Company, 11. d. ), p. 91.

 

a ' .
s
V ' . -
...";F: '33 ‘C
.9 """

Ema 3'93 3e
. ‘IP‘
:3: to a” m

, .
soar finflv ‘-
r...t~ ‘1‘“ -

Iain 0f past
:Thave 9x9":
:21, this 9”
3:: Lie Til-3133:“
ampie after
as never en:
:eire of it CO:
:22, Who fel1
:efitabie €01
the church
assaciated as

When “
iglicative II
is Ihessaloz
1::solations .

5‘
u
\-

second ad
17.?“ H
,ule Its Kt
.3 is u .
ant1c1pe
1a}. ~
..e: mentio
h climax

:‘flt (1811011817

 

 

 

 

126

hundreds of ideas which were never uttered before. "1 It is probably
correct to say that the Apostle has been more often quoted than any
other human being. Commentaries on each of his epistles are almost
beyond number and therefore it would be impossible in this disser-
tation to do more than attend to the dominating concepts found in these
written addresses. If men of genius like Augustine, Luther, and

Calvin of past centuries and such as Monsignor Fulton Sheen of our

day have expatiated with thousands of words upon a single phrase of
Paul, this present analysis could hardly hope to do more than to point
out the mountain peaks of his eloquence. In attempting this we encounter
example after example of the intertwining of emotion and reason. Paul
was never emotional for emotion's sake. Apparently he did not con-
ceive of it consciously as a separate tool of oratory. Rather for this
man, who felt deeply and thought deeply, strong emotion was the
inevitable corollary of strong convictions. Thus throughout his addresses
to the churches pathos and Egfiseem as closely and as naturally
associated as the strands of a rope.

When we follow Croft's suggestion of discovering “the larger
implicative meaning of the Speech" with reference to Paul's message to
the Thessalonians we find that the Apostle is constantly appealing to the
consolations of hope based on the certainty of the Christian doctrines of
the second advent and the resurrection. Says Dean Farrar about this

. epistle "Its key-note is Hope. "2 Thus the Greek word parousia, referring
to the anticipated return of Christ, occurs six times; and every chapter
makes mention of the advent, while half of the last thirty-three verses
which climax the letter are descriptive of events associated with that

great denouement.

 

1Ibid., p. 93.

2F. W. Farrar, The Messages of the Books (London: Macmillan
and Co., 1884), p. 190. Hereafter referred to as Messages.

 

 

 

 

ImiCal O:

_A‘
(I)

u 55"

~" .

the Des

But
those *5
have T10 "
again, 8"
have £31k
Lard, 1h:
Lard, 51‘
Lord hi?
with the .
God. :1?

atiVE, “'1
clouds tt
the Lord

Paul‘s a
:tthose to WE
:iits finality.
iglzally follc
1510211). Ft
"tithe Lord" ;
izse who acc
arrow as ot‘:
izhority and
there his CI

The Ap;
iEScribes the
nine archan;
lithe living k

:31 Other an

..de H

“" Cert;

leads ”The

12.7

Typical of the Apostle' S endeavour to bring consolation through
h0pe is this passage from the heart of the letter.

But we would not have you ignorant, brethren, concerning
those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who
have no hope. For since we believe that Jesus died and rose
again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who
have fallen asleep. For this we declare to you by the word of the
Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the
Lord, shall not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the
Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command,
with the archangel's call, and with the sound of the trumpet of
God. And the dead in Christ will rise first; then we who are
alive, who are left, Shall be caught up together with them in the
clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we Shall always be with
the Lord. Therefore comfort one another with these words.

1 Thess 4:13-18 RSV

Paul's argument is that the resurrection of Christ, believed in
by those to whom he wrote, robbed death of its separating power and
of its finality. If Jesus died and rose again, Paul is saying, then it
logically follows that He also can resurrect others who have fallen into
the tomb. Furthermore Paul argues that his own message is "the word
of the Lord" and therefore to be unhesitatingly believed. In consequence
those who accepted him as a spokesman for the Most High need not
sorrow as others who had no hope. His argument here is based on
authority and was well adapted to those who already had chosen to
believe his claims.

The Apostle is not content to merely refer to the advent. He
describes the cry of command, the sounding of the last trump, the call
of the archangel. He pictures the rising of the dead and the translating
of the living believers and ends on the note of eternal fellowship with
each other and With God. . ”So" he says, "we shall always be with the
Lord. ” Certainly he is not giving way to inordinate emotionalism when

he adds "Therefore comfort one another with these words. "

 

 

“Fee-mtg
.ltd JESus
77'" Note
The COTI‘E
iffigain poi

In cha
g'h‘Phicauy
iese Vers e

:zthe mess;

 

128

This is a typical example of the Apostle's intertwining of logic
and emotion. The emotion grows out of the facts implied by his logic.
It is emotion which he himself shares as part and parcel of his own
clear convictions.

The study of 1 Thessalonians reveals a recurring emphasis upon
this theme of hope, and in each case logical and pathetic implications
are linked. He mentions hope in the very first sentence that follows
his introductory blessing. He refers to his gratitude to God as he
remembered the "steadfastness of h0pe” of the believers. At the end
of this chapter he exults over the way they had turned from idols "to
serve a living and true God, and to wait for His Son from heaven, whom
he raised from the dead, Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come."
In the next chapter Paul reminds them that God has called each of them
to inherit "his own kingdom and glory, " and concludes this section by
saying--"for what is our h0pe or joy or crown of boasting before our
Lord Jesus at his coming? Is it not you? For you are our glory and
joy. ” Note the emphasis again on the words "hope" and "coming. "

In the correSponding place of the next chapter the refrain is similar as
he again points to "the coming of our Lord Jesus with all his saints. "

In chapter four occurs the passage first quoted describing
graphically the advent of Christ and the resurrection. Beginning with
these verses the refrain becomes the controlling factor of the remainder
of the message and is associated with the conclusion as with the intro-
duction. "May your Spirit and soul and body be kept sound and blame-
less at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. " The prayer may be
regarded as the peak of his peroration, for only the subdued hush’ of
salutation succeeds it.

.When we first consider Paul's emphasis upon hope, we are not

greatly impressed for this virtue has become a commonplace in

""stian Cl“!
i~~an culture
1:6 Christ
""istiam'ty‘ s
inns of Pat:-
:rzrenceme:
"Hinges of
Far exa
Don“. re
a day-12
O‘m, w:
the deat
:TEEOgnis v
It is be
nor to .
soon as
VESturq

1 .
a,” (
'w ‘

rom Eu

It Warg
lament

And w}
Shmud
gladne
.1111 pindar.
To and
drift 0:
What v;

\

1

Home
”30m \t.

2

Theog

3s, .

4Pinda

129

Christian civilization. A little consideration however of Graeco-
Roman culture changes our Opinion. Gibbon the historian affirmed
that the Christian stress upon hope was one of the five causes of
Christianity's conquest of paganism. He so declares because the
pagans of Paul's day were almost wholly devoid of hope. From the
commencement of Greek civilization most Greek thinkers had rung
the changes of pessimism.
For example, into the mouth of Achilles Homer placed these words--

Don't recommend death to me; I would prefer in the fields to be
a day-labourer for another, with a man who has no land of his
own, who has not much of a living, rather than rule over all
the dead. 1

In Theognis we read--

It is best of all things for the children of men not to be born,
nor to see the rays of keen sunlight; but if born to pass as
soon as may be the gates of Hades, and to lie beneath a
vesture of much earth/7‘

And from Euripides--

It were better that we should call our friends together to
lament over the newly-born, that he has come to such a world
of sorrows.q‘

And when a man is dead and has found rest from trouble, we
should rejoice and carry him from the house with songs of
gladness.3

And Pindar - -

To and fro toss the h0pes of man, cleaving the waste foam-
drift of a perfidious sea. No man upon earth has found a sure
token from heaven of how it shall fare with him. Warnings of
what will come are wrapt in blind darkness. 4

 

lHomer, Odyssey XI, cited by Wilbur Smith, Therefore Stand
(Boston: W. A. Wilde Co., 1945), p. 241.

zTheognis, Elegies, . 425, cited by Wilbur Smith, p. 242.

 

3Euripides, OriSphontes, cited by Wilbur Smith, p. 242.

 

4Pindar, Olmpian, XII. 1., cited by Wilbur Smith, p. 242.

 

devotion
us any I

tot-Inert:
.(any t},
tithese rep.
ié'm'nt of P;
These:
“:3 were 1'61
537% were
3:5 impossi
.: Employ!“
It thug
3155 letter
5.35.3" whiCh
Time in t}

1.33:1 a Virtue

.',-A
.‘.=

ACCOrd
‘Sneeded Ino

..ilfiind! S tr(

\

lCiC el‘o
_‘ 21311113.,
““1“: p. 242

130

Cicero--

If there miseries are to be permanent, I only wish, my dear-
est, to see you as soon as possible and to die in your arms,
Since neither gods, whom you have worshipped with such pure
devotion, nor men, whom I have always served, have made
us any return. 1

Pliny- -

There is nothing certain save that nothing is certain, and
there is no more wretched and yet arrogant being than man.
The best thing which has been given to man amid the many
torments of this life is, that he can take his own life. 2

Many there were throughout the Roman world who believed as
did these representative thinkers. Large numbers put into practice
the hint of Pliny, and suicide was a common road to death.

These statements enable us to read Paul's words more nearly as
they were received by their first listeners. The consolations Paul
offered were breathtakingly new in the first century of our era, and
it is impossible to conceive of more efficient rhetorical themes than
the employment of these in the message to the bewildered Thessalonians.

It thus becomes apparent that our examination of Paul's approach
in this letter places us at a very Significant point in that "history" of
ideas" which Croft declares "is at the center of Speech criticism. "

We have in this epistle to the Thessalonians the first recorded emphasis
Upon a virtue which was to become a moulding influence on the world of
subsequent centuries.

According to psychiatrist Karl Menninger, this particular virtue
is needed more than ever in this present age. He asserts that many of

mankind's troubles are as much due to the absence of hope as to the

 

1Cicero, Ad Familiares x1v.4.1. , cited by Wilbur smith, p. 242.

 

zPliny, Natural History 11. 7. (5). XXVIII. 1. (2), cited by Wilbur
Smith, p. 242.

 

 

3‘3. llenring
12 do for ti.
1:21 possibf
seem that th
Jul Urged t
fil
ltis h
if he deCle
Thatr
end th
and is
aCC1de
beYOH<

all the
are de

131

evils of "selfislmess, vengefulness, hate, greed, cruelty, destructive-
ness and even self-destructiveness. " Writing in the American Journal
of Psychiatry, Menninger adds-—

Our shelves hold many books now on the place of faith
in science and psychiatry, andon the vicissitudes of man's
efforts to love and to be loved. But when it comes to hope,
our shelves are bare. The Encyclopaedia Britannica devotes many
columns to the topic of love, and many more to faith. But . . .
poor little hope . . . is not even listed. . . .

It was intrepid indeed of St. Paul . . . to declare that hope
should stand along with love.

 

Dr. Menninger further asserts that the best thing that psychiatrists
can do for their patients is to "light for them a candle of hope to show
them possibilities that may become sound expectations. "1 It would
seem that there is some modern support for the value of the concept
Paul urged upon the Thessalonians in his address of two thousand years
ago.

It is highly unlikely that Paul would have achieved his objective
had he declared to the sorrowing believers a message similar to the
following one from philosopher Bertrand Russell.

That man is the product of causes which had no prevision of the
end they were achieving; that his origin, his growth, his hopes,
and fears, his loves and his beliefs, are but the outcome of
accidental collocations of atoms; that no fire, no heroism, no
intensity of thought and feeling, can preserve an individual life
beyond the grave; that all the labors of the ages, all the devotion,
all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness of human genius,
are destined to extinction in the vast death of the solar system,
and that the whole temple of man' s achievement must inevitably
be buried beneath the debris of a universe in ruins-~all these
things, if not quite beyond dispute, are yet so nearly certain that
no philosophy which rejects them can hope to stand. Only within
the scaffolding of these truths, only on the firm foundation of un-
yielding despair can the soul's habitation henceforth be safely built.z

 

1Time, Dec. 28, 1959.

zBertrand Russell, Mysticism and Logic (London: George Allen 81
Unwin, Ltd., 1949). pp. 47-48.

 

“f

i

f .
”‘ .-_

-v-i.!="a PL . ,

 

d ‘

a;efiisinq
:;::emi:g the
.: his w
:I2petent flit

Paul' 5 c

be satis
in intel.
certaznt

hEXSibii

 

132

While it is impossible to demonstrate the certainty of Paul's predictions
concerning the second advent and the resurrection, yet it is obvious
that his skillful presentation of these as the foundation for hope was
competent rhetorical invention.

Paul's critic needs to remember that good judgment demands

. . . no greater certainty of proof in a given case than the data
available and the nature of the field of discussion warrant. To
be satisfied with little rigor in mathematics would be inferiority
in intellectual standards. But equally to demand dogmatic
certainty in practical realms beSpeaks a bigotry which is repre-
hensible. A sense of fitness must operate here as elsewhere. 1

Character of Paul as Reflected in His Messag—e
to The Thessalonians

 

 

It is possible that in the written addresses of St. Paul we have
the best examples of mm ancient oratory. It cannot be too strongly
affirmed that Paul never conveyed ideas merely. He also conveyed
himself. Farrar has said that in the first epistle to the Thessalonians
"a loving fatherly Spirit breathes in every line. " Apparently some
calurnniators had been at work and Paul found it necessary to defend
himself. The defense, with few parallels in literature, has strong
ethical appeal.

For you yourselves know, brethren, that our visit to you was not
in vain; but though we had already suffered and been shamefully
treated at Philippi, as you know, we had courage in our God to
declare to you the gospel of God in the face of great Opposition.
For our appeal does not spring from error or uncleanness, nor
is it made with guile; but just as we have been approved by God
to be entrusted with the gospel, so we speak, not to please men,
but to please God who tests our hearts. For we never used
either words of flattery, as you know, or a cloak for greed, as

 

1Albert E. Avey, The Functions and Forms of Thought, pp. 368-

 

369, quoted by Thonssen and Baird, p. 356.

 

God is v
you or 1'
apostles
taking c
you, me
but also

I

I Q
alv'“. n'.
n.:..; d.
v
is! Fh‘
Dacagatt
O

also, h
you bel
we eoflt
to lead

3: is doubtful
ifetIoos than

\
.‘CL'ld his ‘b
Their coura;
lilistenin;
(*1 and his
treJWEd. ,I
imarly st]
1:“: been a l
Exssities
:such a cr
f‘.‘cp .

..y Clty t

“(5“ .

..dred t0

 

133

God is witness; nor did we seek glory from men, whether from
you or from others, though we might have made demands as

apostles of Christ. ' But we were gentle among you, like a nurse
taking care of her children. SO being affectionately desirous of
you, we were ready to share with you not only the gospel of God
but also our own selves, because you had become very dear to us.

For you remember our labor and toil, brethren; we worked
night and day, that we might not burden any of you, while we
preached to you the gOSpel of God. You are witnesses, and God
also, how holy and righteous and blameless, was our behavior to
you believers; for you know how, like a father with his children,
we exhorted each one of you and encouraged you and charged you
to lead a life worthy of God. . . . 2:1-12 RSV

It is doubtful that any rhetorical manual exists containing a better example

of ethos than the above. How tenderly, delicately does the Apostle

 

remind his hearers of the behaviour of their former missionaries.
Their courage, sincerity, and love are manifested in such a way that
the listening Thessalonians with hearts warming once more towards
Paul and his helpers would be prepared to receive the counsel that
followed. The allusion to self supporting labour in this context is par-
ticularly striking inasmuch as the time of Paul's preaching in Thessalonica
had been a time of famine throughout the empire when the common
necessities of life had mounted in price to Six times their usual value.
In such a crisis it would have been an almost overwhelming temptation
for any one of the mercenary quack teachers who swarmed throughout
every city to eat another's bread rather than undertake the taxing labour
required to secure his own.

The preceding quotation is only one of several in this epistle
which demonstrate the powerful ethical persuasion employed by the

apostolic preacher. He seemed to do intuitively what polished rhetoricians

have laboured to accomplish.

 

Pyrite 01
L______...—

i: the mids
:Ieoied by
Stall later

stri:ture,

tangents
iii-l". to hit
315 flange
11:35 who”

53“ as Pa

 

 

134

Structure of the Address

 

This is an aspect of Paul's oratory that leaves much room for
improvement. There are instances in the epistles of an apparently
bewildering lack of order and arrangement. I

One explanation for this is the extempore nature of the messages.
Ancient orators were mainly wary of extempore addresses. Even
Demosthenes was shy of such work. The writings of Paul were born
in the midst of a life almost unbelievably busy and they were never
intended by their author to be enduring literature. Furthermore as we
shall later notice in detail Paul cared little for laboured schemes of
structure. The jewel, not its casket, concerned him.

It is not meant to suggest by the foregoing that Paul's addresses
are chaotic. This is far from the case. Nevertheless it has to be
admitted that there are entire letters such as 2nd Corinthians and
Philippians which almost defy the possibility of discovering in them any
logical structural arrangement. Such addresses constitute the Spon-
taneous outpouring of the Apostle's heart wherein a primary purpose is
readily perceivable but where also digressive tributaries of thought
are given free course.

In almost all cases the written addresses of Paul are capable of
a sixfold analysis, namely (1) the greeting, (2) the thanksgiving, (3) the
doctrinal portion, (4) the section of practical application, (5) personal
messages, and (6) the farewell. There are inherent values in such
arrangement. Sections one and two always serve to relink the Apostle's
heart to his listeners' as he refers to his present situation in his peril-
ous evangelistic course and then finds some good thing to commend in
those whom he addresses. The next section embodies the statement and

proof as Paul without further ado names the existing problem and

3:2:eeds to i
22:. The p:
:i'oere the
aztion. The
siteo any p-
3T5! his 59.;
CEWS eye}:
In no ‘
litre are if.
igressiom
hiaopnoen
3:3CUlarli
3153 be not
iiare 18 a
liter.
The:
3?.3raises
iiiEnCe C
3de the
“Stein
irtumSta
Eiagnizin
(“Quem
Ethicrural

The
redu
Critj
Stan
121m!

 

 

135

proceeds to indicate the doctrinal principles which indicate the solu-
tion. The practical portion applies that which immediately precedes
and here the message is always searching, personal and definitive of
action. The messages to individuals come next and they serve to
soften any preceding sternness and to reveal Paul as a tender father
over his spiritual children and a good shepherd of the flock which he
knows even to the individual names of its members.

In no instance is it difficult to find lucid thematic emergence, but
there are instances where a modern critic could justly point to lengthy
digressions in the body of the speech which mar the proportionate
development of the central theme. These cases will be indicated
particularly in the study of 2nd Corinthians and Philippians. It should
also be noted that where the structure is not classically balanced the
failure is always due to excessive materials rather than a paucity of
matter.

Thonssen and Baird have pointed out that the critic of structure
“appraises the total organizational plan with reference to the peculiar
audience conditions to which it was presumably accommodated. In other
words the critic recognizes the possibility that a Speech may be a

masterful combination of discrete elements. . . . ”1

Remembering the
circumstances under which the busy Apostle sent his messages and
recognizing his desire to accomplish more than one purpose with his
infrequent correspondence the critic finds his explanation of the Pauline
structural deficiencies. Thonssen and Baird also suggest that--

The critic may find here, as elsewhere, that an attempt to
reduce rhetoric to a set of rules, either on the creative or the
critical side, is a venture in futility. Many effective Speeches
stand as refutation of the claim that a particular way of organ-
izing materials must be followed. 2

 

1Thonssen and Baird, p. 393.
2Ibid., p. 401.

 

 

(1‘!

Oil

d

w

:o':
section :5 8??
...:.3g .‘WO C

. s a ‘ _
iezounc ncr

using of th
35 emphasis
ainoni-tions
ixtrines di
ii the res

iii? revelatf

2: hopeful?

Pasults of 1
\

bTEth,
and ti
ThEre
Your;
afflict

136

In the first epistle to the Thessalonians the structure is clear-
cut. There are two main divisions, one personal and full of reminis-
cences of the past, and the other doctrinal and hortatory with its main
emphasis on present conduct in view of coming events. The first
section is embraced by the first three chapters and the second section in the
closing two chapters. The usual six features of the Pauline letters can
be found here but in this address the personal and practical elements
are blended throughout.

The letter is a unity as has been demonstrated earlier by the
tracing of the theme throughout each chapter. The first section with
its emphasis on§_t_1_l_o_s_paves the way for the second with its practical
adtnonitions. The latter are made the automatic outgrowth of the
doctrines discussed in the fourth chapter, namely the second advent
and the resurrection. Thus by logic based on the premises Of authority
and revelation the Apostle powerfully motivates his flock to earnestly

and hopefully maintain their Christian walk.

Results of the Message

 

It is not always possible to discover the results of Paul's
messages, but in this instance the outcome is clearly stated. Within
a few weeks the Apostle received news from Thessalonica. On the whole
it was favourable; and on sending his second letter his introduction is one
of unusual fervour exPressing his appreciation of their growth in faith
and love.

We are bound to give thanks to God always for you,
brethren, as is fitting, because your faith is growing abundantly,
and the love of every one of you for one another is increasing.
Therefore we ourselves boast of you in the churches of God for
your steadfastness and faith in all your persecutions and in the
afflictions which you are enduring. 2 Thess. 1:3, 4 RSV

. s
, . ,.
' I

gd'oeen rece

ll.

While
:iutch with
isingle so:

In his
Apostle had
Izcld be re
foo would
.. . we \‘
iii". in th:
ll'lave re]
too. as In
is own lii
‘Rldly (it

4:13? S a
.4”

l’ gave
39‘3“ the

tle

(I)

137

It is noteworthy that in this second epistle he has no need to
repeat his admonitions regarding chastity and obedience. Apparently
Paul judged from the news he had received that his prior counsels

had been received and applied.

II. SECOND DISCOURSE TO THE CHRISTIANS
AT THESSALONICA

While the first letter of Paul had been read to the Thessalonian
church with beneficial results, a minority group by wrongly applying
a single word of the epistle veered towards fanaticism.

In his message of hope to the bereaved in Thessalonica the
Apostle had emphasized that at the advent of Christ the righteous dead
would be raised and restored to their loved ones. Speaking of those
who would be living at the day of Christ's appearing, he had said--
". . . we who are alive, who are left, Shall be caught up together with
them in the clouds. "‘ 1 Thess 4:17 RSV. The first word, ”we, " was
to have repercussions that Paul had never contemplated. It was seized
upon as meaning that the Apostle himself expected Christ to come in
his own life time, perhaps) at any moment. Why then be engrossed in
worldly duties? There. is but one obligation and that is to be ready for
Christ's appearance in the clouds. 80 thought some of the Thessalonians.
They gave up their worldly labours and depended on the charity of others.
Paul's word "we" was the excuse for this behaviour. This was the
report that reached Paul not many weeks after his despatch of the first

epistle.

 

 

hate that
:oortanc

The
lilieved h
iéiier S 0

138

Logos, Pathos, and Ethos in 2 Thessalonians

To meet this situation was not quite as Simple as it would first
appear. He could not recant regarding the hope of Christ's coming.
Not only would this be morally impossible but it would erase the bene-
fits of his earlier message, where he had inSpired hope and given
consolation by means Of this particular doctrine. Secondly, he could
not correct the mistaken minority by asserting that while the Advent
was certain it was not near. Paul himself had no fixed idea upon the
time of the coming of Christ. He was familiar with the Latter's own
statement--"of that day and hour knoweth no man, " but he was also
aware that Christ had made His second coming a teaching of prMary
importance throughout His ministry.

The Stress by some on the pronoun ”we" as proving that Paul
believed he would witness the grand denouement cannot be validated.
Readers of the past and present who have used such an argument have
forgotten that Paul also wrote the statement--"He which raised up the
Lord Jesus shall raise up _u_s_ also by Jesus. ” 2 Cor 4:14. If we used
the same exegesis here as in l Thess 4:17 we would have the Apostle
declaring that he expected to be both dead and alive when the last trump
sounded. It is obvious that in both cases Paul is using the pronoun
generically as it is found elsewhere. (See 1 Cor 15:51 and 1 Cor 6:14)

How then was the Apostle to persuade the misguided ones to live
soberly yet withal retaining their hope in the coming of Christ? He
does so by asserting the necessity of obedience to the dictum of Christ--
”Occupy till I come. “ Lu 19: 13. Paul meets the issue by declaring
that proPhecy showed that there were prior events to take place before
the advent and in view of this, Christians were to prepare by patiently

and faithfully fulfilling life's common duties as sacred to the Lord.

139

. . . the main object of his second letter was to control into
calm, and shame into diligence, the gossiping enthusiasm which
fatally tended towards irregularity and sloth. They were not to
desert the hard road of the present for the mirage which seemed
to bring so close to them the green Edens of the future; they
were not to sacrifice the sacredness of immediate duty for the
dreamy sweetness of unrealised expectations.1

Because Christians have always looked upon themselves as only
pilgrims in this transitory world, it was no easy matter to persuade
concerning the importance, the sacredness, and the necessity of faith-
fully accomplishing the humdrum duties of daily living. Human nature
is always prone to live in the future or past rather than the present
and Christian human nature had the same weakness. In the counsel
given to offset this tendency we find evidence of the practical common
sense of Paul. He was no dreamy mystic such as the vernacular
describes by the reference to one who is "so heavenly minded as to be
of no earthly use. "

It is easy to trace Paul's psychology of approach in this letter.
In the first chapter he praises God for the faithfulness of the
Thessalonians as a church and he repeats the hOpe that had been the
emphasis of his preceding letter. He speaks of "rest . . . when‘the
Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven . . . when he comes on that day
to be glorified in his saints, and to be marveled at in all who have
believed, because our testimony to you was believed. " 2 Thess 1:7-10.
Thus he reaffirms his previous position and in effect declares that
though some have perverted a glorious truth the reality is not to be
repudiated. In fact this second letter like the first makes reference
to the advent in every chapter.

Next he goes to the very heart of the matter.

 

1Farrar, Life and Work of St. Paul, p. 34(1.

 

 

 

lfl.. “.--
——

Li": of this
Illfiden‘t t‘r
Eliot it b.-
5111 50 ins
After
isletter I
t:pOWeI‘ (
33“ again
“.3: with tl‘.
3331 13531.1(
forhis Strc
5’ wOr'L-ts
In the
And ‘
and \t
YOUr
ThESt

:51: tacti’u

Ellie the l

140

Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our
assembling to meet him, we beg you, brethren, not to be
quickly shaken in mind or excited, either by Spirit or by word,
or by letter purporting to be from us, to the effect that the
day of the Lord has come. Let no one deceive you in any way;
for that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first,
and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of perdition,
who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or
object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of
God, proclaiming himself to be God . . . And you know what
is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time.

’2 Thess 2:1-6. RSV
Thus Paul brings to the remembrance of his hearers the Old Testament
prophecies concerning the Antichrist who would precede the setting up
of the kingdom of God. He reminds the Thessalonians that he had told
them of this matter when he was with them. In effect he says, I am,
confident that you will understand what I am saying on this matter. and
acc: ept it because not only is this foretold in the books of the prophets
but I so instructed you when I was with you two years ago.

After his reference to the advent in the first section (chapter) of
his letter Paul had expressed the hopethat the Thessalonians through
the power of God would fulfil every good work with faithfulness. (l: 11).
NOW again after his discussion of the Antichrist he repeats this admoni-

tion with the prayer that the believers might be established ”in every

gOOd work and word. ” 2 Thess 2:16. Thus gently does he pave the way

for his stronger admonition to the wayward who had been neglectful of

good works.
In the third and last chapter we read:

And we have confidence in the Lord about you, that you are doing
and will do the things which we command. May the Lord direct
your hearts . . . to the steadfastness of Christ. 3:4, 5 RSV

These words with their courteous expression of confidence and
their tactful allusion to steadfastness constitute the last softening touch

before the strong and direct appeal concerning those in error.

an axe.
gave Y
eat. I
busyb;

Jesus
living.
This 5
23136 in “1:5.
eS“ed the
ril'ld then
:11 behavio
Impetence
EZtJI’itatiV
Emoti
imwing th:
:th Chum
Ecation.

IJPES We re '

141

Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus
Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in
idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received
from us. For you yourselves know how you ought to imitate us;
we were not idle when we were with you, we did not eat any
one's bread without paying, but with toil and labor we worked
night and day, that we might not burden any of you. It was not
because we have not that right, but to give you in our conduct
an example to imitate. For even when we were with you, we
gave you this command; If any one will not work, let him not
eat. For we hear that some of you are living in idleness, mere
busybodies, not doing any work.

Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord
Jesus Christ to do their work in quietness and to earn their own
living. Brethren, do not be weary in well-doing. 3:6-13 RSV

This section provides also the strongest evidences of ethos to be

 

found in this epistle. While the very first sentences of the letter
stressed the Apostle's sincere love for his converts, these last words
remind them of the practical evidences of that love, namely his unsel-
fish behaviour when among them. The third constituent of ethical proof,
competence, is manifested throughout the whole epistle by the sure

authoritative touch and practical counsel.

Emotional appeal is found early in this address. Immediately
following the greeting and the thanksgiving, Paul refers to the suffering
of this church because of persecution. He promises future rest and
vindication, and paints a graphic picture of that event on which all their
hopes were centered--"when the Lord [issue is revealed from heaven
with his mighty angels in flaming fire . . . . "

The comprehensive benediction of peace was also calculated to
act as a soothing balm following his immediately preceding stern
admonitions. ”Now may the Lord of peace himself give you peace at
all times in all ways. "

Reviewing the integrity of ideas found in this second address to

the Thessalonians, we are first of all impressed that Paul's approach

142

to the emergency situation was not one of the makeshift variety. He
selected as his theme the sacredness of the duties of everyday life in
view of our ignorance regarding the exact time of the end of all things.
We find that the same doctrine occurs elsewhere in Paul. For example--
"And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto

men. " "Whether therefore ye eat or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do
all to the glory of God. ” ”Whatsoever ye do, in word or in deed, do

all in the name of the Lord Jesus. " In each case the Apostle renders
the so-called "common" life sacred. It is particularly significant that
the first sentence quoted above was addressed to Christians who were
slaves. Labour, however humble, is thus glorified by the teaching of
the Apostle, and the influence of this concept through the centuries has
been beyond measure. Monasticism and a thousand other irregularities
might have been avoided if the Apostle's thought had been understood.
Many are the writers who have gained inSpiration from this concept and
publicised it to the world. Herbert had this in mind when he wrote

"Who sweeps a‘room as for thy laws,
Makes that and th' action fine. "1

W. C. Gannett's classic essay Blessed be Drudgery and multitudinous

 

other works could be cited as flowing from the same spring.

Arrangement

 

This letter follows the usual six-fold pattern of Paul's epistles.
The greeting is found in 1:1, 2. The Thanksgiving is presented in
verses three to twelve of the same chapter. In the second chapter we
have the doctrinal discussion of the Man of Sin. The last chapter is
practical in its admonitions, and’it is followed as usual by the final

salutation and benediction in the concluding verses.

 

1George Herbert "The Elixir”: I, 19. The Works of George
Herbert in Prose and Verse, edited by Robert Aris Willmott (New York:
D. Appleton 81 Co. , 1857).

 

 

 

ill the III
Wide us
Present Us
7511 this

iRaise t}

Tle Occas
\

The
is the ROI;r

 

 

 

143

Results

Nothing whatever is definitely known regarding the immediate

results of this second letter of Paul's to the Thessalonians.

III. THE FIRST DISCOURSE TO THE CORINTHIANS

The ”thoughtful study of the historical pattern in which speeches
are set" has always been recommended by speech critics. The neces-
sityfor this injunction is demonstrated immediately as one grapples
with Paul's first address to the Corinthians.

Only the original recipients of these letters could catch every
intimation in Paul's words. We of today meet one difficulty
after another in our attempts at projecting ourselves back into
the situation as it existed in Corinth. 1

Only the understanding of the enviromnent of the church at Corinth can
provide us with the keys necessary for interpreting this message, and
present us with some insight regarding the nature of Paul's audience.
With this knowledge as a background, it becomes a simpler task to

appraise the Speechcraft of the evangelical persuader.

The Occasion

 

The city of Corinth was the. capital of Southern Greece, then known
as the Roman province of Achaia. It was the Vanity Fair of the Empire,
and the London and Paris of the first century of our era. Contemporaries
referred to it as ”the star of Hellas, " ”the gate of the Peloponnesus, "
and “the bridge of the sea, " these two latter expressions referring to
its strategic position on the Grecian isthmus between the Morea and
the Continent. In fact, it is from this particular isthmus that the word

has been extended to name every similar neck of land throughout the

 

1Richard C. H. Lenski, Interpretation of St. Paul's First and
Second Epistle to the Corinthians (Ohio: Lutheran Book Concern, 1935),

 

p. 7.

Lire W0?
:5 the at}
:iustrial
tranSpart .
irectly o:
:mected
Tispme, ;
haughou
larbaurs,
Cree}: ma
i‘npbyed
associate

The

and
I‘is
She

to t
W0]
Lib
W0C
and

the

144

entire world. Corinth thus had two harbours, one leading to the east,
and the other to the West. ‘Its strategic position as a commercial and
industrial center had no parallel in the Roman world. As regards
transport from Rome and Italy to Asia Minor and Syria, Corinth was
directly on the main route. The first triremes of the Greeks are
connected with Corinth's history. One of the chief local gods was
Neptune, and Corinthian colonies were scattered over distant coasts
throughout the west and east. From every sea, ships came to her
harbours, and Corinth thus became the habitual resort and the universal
Greek market. Many from among her population of 400, 000 were
employed in the manufactures in metallurgy, dyeing, and porcelain,
associated with the import and export trade.

The famous Isthmian games regularly brought multitudes of
strangers. About a century and a half before Paul, the city had been
largely destroyed because of its leadership of the Achaian league against
Rome. For a hundred years the city was little more than a ruin until
in 46 B. C. Julius Caesar had it rebuilt and made a Roman colony.

By Paul's day the city was experiencing a period of unparalleled
prosperity, and with the flood of wealth and commerce had come also a
flood of vice and materialism. Farrar aptly describes what the scene
must have been when the pioneer of the gosPel entered it.

Splendid buildings, enriched with ancient pillars of marble
and porphyry, and adorned with gold and silver, soon began to
rise side by side with the wretched huts of wood and straw which
sheltered the mass of the poorer population. Commerce became
more and more active. Objects of luxury soon found their way
to the marts, which were visited by every nation of the civilized
world-~Arabian balsam, Egyptian papyrus, Phoenician dates,
Libyanvivory, Babylonian carpets, Cilician goats'-hair, Lycaonian
wool, Phygian slaves. With riches came superficial refinement
and literary tastes. The life of the wealthier inhabitants was
marked by self-indulgence and intellectual restlessness, and
the mass of the pe0p1e, even down to the slaves, were more or

less affected":I

It was 1."
population of C.
”tainting iniusi
soldiers, phi‘.
tradeSpeOple,
a colony "with
established cit
his way.l

Tie same writer h

:iic‘ition ot' the city

 

But there was
come home to
fill his pure 5
of a city cons;
cities of a dy:
Synonym for i
Corinth was 6
a tI'YSllng-pla
Vast numeric;
later, the Ci:-
from acting a
had there ta}:
WhiCh it was
Hierodouloi .
infamous Te:
whose tomb ;
head betWEEr
.representati.
1n the new 0
Paphian gOCiC

The citadel c
Pisition

145

less affected by the prevailing tendency. . . .

It was into the midst of this mongrel and heterogeneous
population of Greek adventurers and Roman bourgeois, with a
tainting infusion of Phoenicians--this mass of Jews, ex-
soldiers, philosophers, merchants, sailors, freedmen, slaves,
tradespeople, hucksters, and agents of every form of vice--

a colony ”without aristocracy, without traditions, without well-
established citizens"—-that the toil-worn Jewish wanderer made
his way. 1

The same writer has given a comprehensive picture of the moral
condition of the city.

But there was one characteristic of heathen life which would
come home to him at Corinth with overwhelming force, and

fill his pure soul with infinite pain. It was the gross immorality
of a city conSpicuous for its depravity even amid the depraved
cities of a dying heathenism. Its very name had become a
synonym for reckless debauchery. This abysmal profligacy of
Corinth was due partly to the influx of sailors, who made it

a trysting-place for the vices of every land, and partly to the
vast numerical superiority of the slaves, of which, two centuries
later, the city was said to contain many myriads. And so far
from acting as a check upon this headlong immorality, religion
had there taken under its immediate protection the very pollutions
which it was its highest function to suppress. A thousand
Hierodouloi were consecrated to the service of Impurity in the
infamous Temple of Aphrodite Pandemos. The Lais of old days,
whose tomb at Corinth had been marked by a Sphinx with a human
head between her claws, had many shameless and rapacious
representatives. East and west mingled their dregs of foulness
in the new Gomorrah of classic culture, and the orgies of the
Paphian goddess were as notorious as those of Isis or of Asherah.z

The citadel of Corinth was located in an almost impregnable
position, situated as it was upon the Acro-Corinthus, a great mass of
rock which rose to a height of l, 800 feet. Perhaps it was the extensive
east and west view from here that suggested to Paul the strategic

importance of the city as the site for a strong Christian church.

 

1F. W. Farrar, The Life and Work of St. Paul (New York:
E. P. Dutton and Co., 1880), p. 315.

zlbid., p. 316.

 

146

From the summit it was possible to view the Acr0polis of Athens
forty-five miles away; and being reminded of his only slight success
there, the Apostle no doubt yearned for a missionary center from
which Athens could be conquered for the gospel. Paul apparently
planned to stay longer at Corinth than at any other city he had yet
visited, and because of this he early established himself in a home, and
at his old trade. Priscilla and Aquila, from among the Jews expelled
from Rome by Claudius, became the intimate associates of Paul.
Probably this couple was already Christian, as we have no story of
their conversion.

Following his custom, Paul began his preaching in the synagogue;
but when the uSual opposition became apparent, he used the house
adjoining as his meeting place. The record declares that Crispus,
Fuler of the synagogue, joined the new group of believers. It would
appear from 1 Cor 1:14 that Paul personally baptised this eminent con-
vert. By this time Silas and Timothy had reached Paul's side from
Macedonia. Together with the Apostle, after he had spent eighteen
months in evangelism, they faced a new threat from the Jews, when
the latter appealed to a recently arrived successor to the former pro-
consul. Gallio was the brother of the famous Seneca, and apparently
his own philosoPhy was brpad and tolerant. He drove the Jews out of
his court and did not prevent the mob from taking hold of Sosthenes,
the main opponent of the new teaching, and beating him. Sosthenes had
been elected as successor to CriSpus. Amid such exciting events the
Christian church, constituted of converted Jews and Gentiles, took root
and began to grow.

While the inSpirational figure of Paul was by the side of the new

members, they prosPered; but to remain steadfast in the midst of so

many attractions of their former mode of living when the Apostle left

 

 

 

 

.
,.. Ana n
A;:C1.;Ji.i

 

147

was another matter. During the three years absence of its founder,
the "vision Splendid" began to fade. The believers were daily in sight
and hearing of all that was contrary to their new profession. It was
hard to believe that the things which were seen were only temporal,
and thus the city began to reconvert some of those whom it had appar-
ently lost.

It was a Jewish Christian named Apollos who brought this news
to Paul. Immediately the agitated Apostle sent a letter to the church
warning its members not to associate with the immoral. Thus we read
in 1 Cor 5:9 the words: ”I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company
with fornicators. " As for the actual letter, it no longer exists. It was
one of many apostolic messages which were not preserved for the
sacred canon by the Christian church because their content was deemed
local and temporal in application. In reply to this message from Paul,
the Corinthian church returned a self-complacent epistle containing
requests for counsel on a number of practical issues but not mentioning
their true condition and basic needs. With reference to this word from
the Greek believers we read at the commencement of a new section in
1 Corinthians: ”Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me.

. " (1 Cor 7:1). Judging from an allusion made by Paul in his first
chapter (1:11), however, the discerning Apostle did not accept the
Corinthian letter at its face value. Apparently he closely questioned 1
those who had conveyed the letter from the church, and in this way he
learned far more than from their epistle. Furthermore, he sought out
a Corinthian family by the name of Chloe who had moved to Ephesus,
and from them were gathered further details regarding the backslidden
state of their home-church. He was informed that schism, strife,
irreverent behavior at worship services, heresy, and legalising Judaists
threatened to disintegrate the Christian congregation at Corinth. Only

of minor significance were the issues raised by the Greeks in their

Ever. F3

in

ru
0
3:1

3.1

   

letter.

1.

148

For example, their questions included the following:

A series of inquiries regarding marriage. Was married life
in itself a bad thing, or'at least undesirable? Was celibacy

a more worthy condition? If persons were already married,
would it be best to live as though they were unmarried?

Was it right for widows and widowers to marry again? Should
mixed marriages between Christians and pagans be tolerated,
or ought a Christian partner to repudiate the relationship and

separate ?

What should their relationship be to idolatrous festivals, and
the purchasing of cheap foods which had been used in pagan
worship? Should they go as guests to the homes of pagan
friends and relations, thus taking the risk that food placed

before them may have been offered to idols?

In church assemblies should women be permitted to worship
with their heads uncovered? Were women to be allowed to

bpeak or teach publicly in the church?

As regards Spiritual gifts, how important was the gift of
speaking in tongues ? What should be done if several in the
public assembly began to exercise their gifts or assumed

gifts at the same time?

Was the resurrection to be only something spiritual or did

it apply to the body?

What plans should they make regarding the collection of gifts

for the poor believers in Judea?

Paul's reply to the Corinthians not only gives counsel on each of

these matters, but also it admonishes the church regarding the dis-

orders they had not mentioned, but concerning which Paul had learned

149

from other sources. The latter issues included the following:

1. The church had become split up into factions. One group
claimed Peter as its head; another took the name of Paul, and
yet another claimed itself to be the Christ party. A fourth

group declared themselves to be followers of Apollos.

2. Some Judaizing Christian teachers had appeared who poured
contempt upon Paul. They accused him of making void the
Jewish ceremonial law. They asserted that Paul had never
claimed financial support from the church because he recog-
nized his own insecure position, unlike other Apostles such
as Peter, who claimed the financial support of believers

rather than participate in secular labour. 1

Paul was only a
prating tent-maker without true apostolic authority, suggested
some Corinthians. He had not even kept his promise about

returning to see them.

3. The Agapé had degenerated from the reverent ritual taught
by Paul to an irreverent and, at times, blaSphemous gathering.
The Corinthians had been taught to share their provisions at
a communal feast and then to partake of the symbolic bread
and wine. As it now was, the rich were bringing luxurious
fare, and neglecting the exercise of charity towards their less
fortunate brethren. Some were guilty of partaking of the

Sac rament while half- intoxicated.

4. One church member was living with his stepmother in illicit

union, and the church as a whole did nothing about this

 

11 Cor 9:4-7 makes it clear that most of the Apostles accepted
financial support from the churches for whom they laboured. Paul
Specifically mentions that this was the practice of Peter.

150

dereliction, probably because many others in the church were

participating in sins of impurity.

This report, gleaned by Paul from visitors from Corinth, when
combined with the questions sent by the church, provides a partial
picture at least of the audience to which the Apostle must now shape
his discourse. Only a very strong character would refuse to be dis-
couragedat the news of this apparent collapse of his work. Paul could
have uttered a wait of deSpair and washed his hands of the fickle
Corinthians. Or he might have sent them a burning vehement letter of
reproach consigning them all to perdition. The fact that he chose to do
neither of these things tells us much concerning the spiritual stature of
the'tent-maker. Instead he dictated an address to the backsliders which
is a model of practical good-sense, forbearance, and love. His message
Sprang straight from the heart. He himself tells us that he composed it
in agony of mind and amid many tears.

Even his most elaborate Epistles were in reality not elaborate.
They leapt like vivid Sparks from a heart in which the fire of
love to God burnt until death with an ever brighter and brighter
flame. l

. . . the very writings which Spring most naturally and Spon-
taneously from a noble and sincere emotion, are often those that
produce the deepest impression upon the world, and are less
likely to be resented--at any rate, are more likely to be useful--
than the tutored and polished utterances which are carefully
tamed down into the limits of correct conventionality. Not only
the Church of Corinth, but the whole world, has gained from the
intensity of the Apostle's feelings, and the impetuous Spontaneity
of the language in which they were expressed. 2

 

lFarrar, St. Paul, p. 384.
21bid., p. 401.

 

 

 

 

...-

~-

4“.

LI 1
r.

 

 

N;

 

 

151

Analysis of the Development of Ideas, with
Particular Emphasis on Logos

 

It is obvious that to correct the manifold disorders of the
audience which Paul was addressing would be no easy task. What plan
did the Apostle ad0pt?

One is first impressed regarding the plan he did 113: adopt. If
one studies the somewhat similar letter sent by Gregory the Great to
St. Augustine in reply to enquiries regarding the management of the
English converts, it will be found that Gregory was decisive and minute
about even the smallest details of conduct. This is not true of Paul
in this epistle. He chooses, rather, to suggest first principles to his
hearers in order that they might learn how to decide individually in
even the smallest issues of daily living. He does not relieve them of
the necessity of making their own decisions in doubtful matters of
behaviour, but urges them to that maturity of character whereby every
problem finds its solution as it is subjected to the test of a major
principle of morality. For example, when dealing with the problem
of schism in the church, Paul purposely refrains from associating
himself with any of the divisions. He refrains from saying which groups
are in the wrong. Instead he declares that the Church of God is holy,
and that whoever brings damage to it in any way will thus destroy him-
self.

Do you not know that you are God's temple and that God's
Spirit dwells in you? If any one destroys God's temple, God
will destroy him. For God's temple is holy, and that temple
you are. 1 Cor 3:16, 17. RSV

Similarly, inasmuch as the schismatics had magnified the different
abilities of their respective leaders, and contended for one man above
the others, Paul purposefully minimizes the importance of human

agencies and exalts God.

What
ymib
mete:
nor b
He‘#
care
Inen
Sole
Paul
theft
God'
For'
dhin
itwe

.zeproble

i'rnan bod

heiayth

The
the ]
rais
are;
(3hrj
not]
bod)
But

GhO‘

h

OVflk

. would he

1?

ii

(A
1.:
U

‘thESe.
Z“Spirit

brist.

“ieto do

\.
*‘x
w:

.\_
‘\‘
\

 

w0u1d ‘

152

What then is Apollos? What is Paul? Servants through whom

you believed, as the Lord assigned to each. I planted, Apollos
watered, but God gave the growth. So neither he who plants

nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth.
He who plants and he who waters are equal, and each shall re-
ceive his wages according to his labor. For we are fellow work-
men for God; you are God's field, God's building. 1 Cor 3:5-9 RSV

So let no one boast of men. For all things are yours, whether
Paul or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or
the future, all are yours; and you are Christ's and Christ is
God's. 1 Cor 3:21-23 RSV

For who sees anything different in you? What have you that you
did not receive? If then you received it, why do you boast as if
it were not a gift? 1 Cor 4:7 RSV

The problem of immorality is met by pointing out the sacredness of the
human body. It belongs to Christ and therefore can not be prostituted.
One day the body is to be resurrected.

The body is not meant for immorality, but for the Lord, and
the Lord for the body. And God raised the Lord and will also
raise us up by his power. Do you not know that your bodies
are members of Christ? Shall I therefore take the members of
Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never'. Do you
not know that he who joins himself to a prostitute becomes one
body with her? For, as it is written "The two shall become one. "
But he who is united to the Lord becomes one Spirit with him.
. . . Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy
Ghost within you, which you have from God? You are not your
own; you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.
1 Cor 6:13-20 RSV

It would have been impossible to provide stronger incentives to purity
than these--the principles of union with Christ, of being indwelt by the
Holy Spirit, of being the redeemed possession of God bought by the blood
of Christ. Whether we agree with the principles here enunciated has
little to do with their appropriateness in the argument of the Apostle.
His hearers had previously acknowledged the validity of such principles

and would do so again.

 

 

 

 

 

153

In answering the queries concerning marriage, again. the Apostle
lays down principles, rather than detailed injunctions, regarding
behaviour. In those matters where Christ had not given specific.
instruction, Paul leaves every man free to be ”fully persuaded in his
own mind" and to obey the right as God gave him to see the right.
While Paul is often accused of having the attitude of an ascetic regard-
ing marriage, the close study of 1 Cor 7: 2-7 in the Greek or in any
reputable modern version is found to lend no support to this view. He
declares:

The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and
likewise the wife to her husband. 1 Cor 7:3 RSV

While he points out that celibacy has advantages, he also stresses
its disadvantages in verses two and nine of this chapter. His apparent
favouring of celibacy needs to be viewed with reference to the troubled
state of the times and the peculiar conditions of the most corrupt city
in Greece. Throughout this chapter the underlying thought is that
expressed in verses 15 and 24.

. . . God has called us to peace.
So, brethren, in whatever state each was called, there

let him remain with God.

Thus he warns against the excessive scrupulosity of those who
felt they should separate from unbelieving partners.

The primary principle to guide all is found in verses 29-31.
Here he declares that all things are to be done with the understanding
of the temporary and preparatory nature of this earthly existence.

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 though they were not mourning, and those
who rejoice as though they were not rejoicing, and those who buy
as though 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. RSV

154

The principle expressed in these words is that all temporal
matters are to be subjected to the eternal and ever placed in a
secondary status.

The supreme test that Paul suggests for indifferent matters,
such as the use of foods offered to idols, is the test of love. The
Corinthians had boasted by letter to Paul that "all of us possess
knowledge" and therefore could they not please themselves in this
matter. In reply the Apostle says:

Now concerning food offered to idols: we know that "all of us
possess knowledge. " "Knowledge" puffs us, but love builds up.
If any one imagines that he knows something, he does not yet
know as he ought to know. But if one loves God, one is known
by him. Hence, as to the eating of food offered to idols, we
know that "an idol has no real existence, " and that ”there is no
God but one. " . . . However not all possess this knowledge.
. . . Only take care lest this liberty of yours somehow become
a sturnbling-block to the weak. For if any one sees you, a man
of knowledge, at table in an idol's temple, might he not be
encouraged, if his conscience is weak, to eat food offered to
idols? . . . Thus, sinning against your brethren and wounding
their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ.

1 Cor 8:1-2 RSV

Thus the Apostle asserts the principle that love, not our so-called
rights, is to govern us in all matters. Next he skillfully employs

the same argument in defense of himself against the accusations of the
visiting Judaizers. They had declared that Paul must have felt his own
authority to be insecure inasmuch as he had not claimed support from
the church at Corinth. Now Paul applies his preceding argument in
this matter, pointing out that he also had foregone his rights in order
to build up the church. This next section defends his apostolicity, the
privileges associated therewith as rightfully his, and exPlainS his

self- supporting ministry while at Corinth. In these and following

verses Paul contends for his rights, using the following arguments.

 

 

155

1. Arguments from the analogies of the soldier, husbandman,

and shepherd.
2. Argument from the use of an Old Testament Scripture.

3. Argument from the natural law of gratitude for received

benefits .

4. Argument from the practices in the Jewish Temple whereby

the priests received as food a share in the sacrifices.
5. Argument from Christ's own rule.

Then he declares that despite his right to financial support he
had not availed himself of it lest he hinder the progress of the gospel.

What then is my reward? Just this: that in my preaching I may
make the gosPel free of charge, not making full use of my right
in the gOSpel.

For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a
slave to all, that I might win the more. To the Jews I became
as a Jew, in order to win Jews; to those under the law I became
as one under the law--though not being myself under the law--
that I might win those under the law. To those outside the law
I became as one outside the law--not being without law toward

.' God but under the law of Christ--that I might win those outside
the law. To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak.
I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means
save some. I do it all for the sake of the gOSpel, that I may
share in its blessings. 1 Cor 9:18:23 RSV

Next Paul shows that Christians are engaged in no mock battle,
no "soft" way of life, and that therefore they are to exert all their
strength in order to be overcomers. He illustrates from the famous
Grecian games with which both he and his listeners are familiar.

Do you not know that in a race all the runners compete, but only
one receives the prize? So run that you may obtain it. Every
athlete exercises self-control in all things. They do it to
receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. Well,

I do not run aimlessly, I do not box as one beating the air; but

I pommel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others
I myself should be disqualified. 1 Cor 9: 24-27 RSV

 

 

fit

.-.ii:ior.al
:1: the e
:zzslude t

31:5 :56 p

Cod
stre
esce

L2 CLL'IchXi
JIEI‘EQ l0

~491- .
Hui tiror

tot

thir
that;

The

156

Additional illustrations of the need for spiritual exertion are drawn
from the experiences of ancient Israel. Lest the Corinthians should
conclude that the battle was too difficult and therefore deSpair, he
adds the promise;

God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your
strength, but with the temptation will also provide the way of
escape, that you may be able to endure it. 1 Cor 10:13 RSV

In climaxing his appeal to the Corinthians on this issue of eating foods
offered to idols, the Apostle repeats the guiding principles and then
with strong common sense suggests appropriate modes of behaviour in this

matter.

"All things are lawful, ” but not all things are helpful. "All
things are lawful, " but not all things build up. Let no one seek
his own good, but the good of his neighbor. Eat whatever is
sold in the meat market without raising any question on the
ground of conscience. For "the earth is the Lord's and every-
thing in it. " If one of the unbelievers invites you to dinner and
you are diSposed to go, eat whatever is set before you without
raising any question on the ground of conscience. (But if some
one says to you, "This has been offered in sacrifice, " then out
of consideration for the man who informed you, and for con-
science' sake--I mean his conscience, not yourS--do not eat
it.) . . .

So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all
to the glory of God. Give no offense to Jews or to Greeks or
to the church of God, just as I try to please all men in every-
thing I do, not seeking my own advantage, but that of many,
that they may be saved. Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ.

1 Cor 10:23- 11:1. RSV

The counsel which he had given regarding the food offered to
idols might have been objected to by some on the grounds that their
liberty would thus be curtailed because of the uneducated consciences
of a few. Now Paul shows that he had practiced what he now taught.

Am I not free? Am I not an -apostle? Have I not seen Jesus
our Lord? Are not you my workmanship in the Lord? If to

others I am not an Apostle, at least I am to you: for you are
the seal of my .apostleship in the Lord.

n!

(1‘

157

This is my defense to those who would examine me. Do
we not have the right to our food and drink? Do we not have
the right to be accompanied by a wife, as the other apostles
and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas? Or is it only Barnabas
and I who have no right to refrain from working for a living?
Who serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vine-
yard without eating any of the fruit? Who tends a flock without
getting some of the milk?

Do I say this on human authority? Does not the law say
the same? For it is written in the law of Moses, "You shall not
muzzle an ox when it is treading out the grain. " Is it for oxen
that God is concerned? Does he not Speak entirely for our sake?
It was written for our sake, because the plowman should plow
in hope and the thresher thresh in hope of a Share in the crop.

If we have sown Spiritual good among you, is it too much if we
reap your material benefits ? If others share this rightful claim
upon you, do not we still more?

Nevertheless, we have not made use of this right, but we
endure anything rather than put an obstacle in the way of the
gospel of Christ.

The next problem was concerning personal appearance while
at church. The custom among the Jews and the Romans was to pray
with heads covered, but the Greek custom was the reverse. As regards
the attire of women there was also a difference. Many of the women in
Corinthian church, on the grounds of the equality of the sexes in Christ,
were worshipping without the usual head covering that was the customary
acknowledgment of subjection to a husband. Paul, therefore, decides
in favour of the local custom, that men should not have covered heads
at worship but that the women should. He here asserts that Christians
should never differ from custom unless on the grounds of principle.
Women for example, were to accept their customary station despite
their equality in Christ.

The Apostle proceeds to rebuke sternly the profaners of the
Lord's Supper; and to aid them in reformation, he gives a simPle

narrative of the institution of that service and a solemn warning of the

 

 

158

dangers involved in sacrilege. He points out that self-examination
Should precede participation in the ordinance and adds: "if we judged
ourselves truly, we should not be judged. " Thus he indicates that
reformation of manners will mean benefit--if they participate accord-
ing to his directions, they are less likely to meet with condemnation
in the Judgment.

To eXplain all that is involved in the subject of Spiritual gifts,
and especially the gift of tongues, with which Paul is next concerned
would require a book in itself. Here we shall only sketch the situation
and then point out the method ad0pted by Paul to straighten out the dis-
orders and the fanaticism in this matter into which these early Christians
had fallen. Christians believe that after Christ ascended, the Holy
Spirit descended and with Him special Spiritual gifts which were to aid
in the task of the building up of the church. Among these gifts was the
gift of tongues. Scholars differ as to whether these were actual
languages or ecstatic utterances or both. At Corinth some believing
themselves to have this gift had insisted on dominating assemblies by
their extravagent use of the same. Confusion was the result. Paul
aims to repair this Situation by urging genuine spiritual humility which
will prevent pseudo Spiritual exhibitionism. He begins by pointing out
that every believer in Christ has some spiritual gift and that this comes
by divine grace and that therefore no one is to boast himself above
another. He declares that the gifts which seem the least outstanding
may actually be the most important and that, therefore, those who
believed themselves to be the possessors of "major" gifts Should walk
in humility. He employs the analogy of the human body to represent
the church composed of individuals of diverse talents.

For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the
members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with
Christ. For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body--

 

 

L‘L

 

 

 

159

Jews or Greeks, Slaves or free--and all were made to drink
of one Spirit. . . .

But God has so adjusted the body, giving the greater
honor to the inferior part, that there may be no discord in
the body, but that the members may have the same care for
one another. If one member suffers, all suffer together; if
one member is honored, all rejoice together. Now you are
the body of Christ and individually members of it.

i 1 Cor 12:12-27 RSV

We owe to this disorder in the Corinthian church one of the greatest
gems of rhetoric--the thirteenth chapter of 1 Corinthians, the paean
to love. Few who quote it are aware of the context in which it is
placed. Paul has just pointed out that all have Special gifts. He has
Shown that some of these gifts are apparently superior and that these
are not entrusted to every man. Now he adds: "I will show you a still
more excellent way. ” He promises to point to a mode of conduct more
excellent than the exhibiting of brilliant talents. Quite apart from its
significance in terms of moral value, it is doubtful if any item of
literature or oratory of similar length has such beauty or power.
When we remember that it originated with the Apostle of EL and in
an age when love's counterfeits abounded, this passage appears the
more outstanding.

By what mystery of genius or grace of divine plan did this
naturally proud, self-assertive, intolerant man write the world's
greatest ode to love? Love is a theme more written about than
any other since the world began. The poets of all languages and
all generations have sung its praises. Yet it was reserved for
this persecuted Jew, with a mind trained in rabbinical subtleties,
in a casual letter, written in haste to meet a pressing condition,
to sing the song of love which surpasses anything in truth, in
comprehensiveness, in beauty, composed by any poet of the
ancient or modern world. 1

 

1Charles Allen Dinsmore, The English Bible as Literature
(Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1931), p. 291.

 

 

U)
L)

0.}:

L3,“. ha
azeotisl

guestiori

160

So perfect a literary production is this 13th chapter of l Corin-
thians that many have refused to believe that Paul could have spon-
taneously dictated it in the writing of a casual letter. They have
questioned the fact that this section actually belonged to the original

epistle. However as pointed out in The Interpreter's Biblel ". . . on

 

closer examination it is seen that almost every word in the chapter
has been chosen with this particular situation at Corinth in mind. "

[V 10:165]. For example, the Apostle aims to correct the extravagant
use of the gift of tongues or some counterfeit of it. He has introduced
this subject in the preceding chapter and proposes to Spend all the
succeeding chapter on the same topic. In the intersPersed psalm of
love he purposely contrasts the glamour and duration of this gift with
the true splendour and eternal nature of love. "Though I Speak with
the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become
as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal." "Charity never faileth . . .
whether there be tongues, they shall cease. . . . " vs 1’, 8. It is
evident that the matrix of this pearl was the emergency at Corinth.
DeSpite this, we have here a chapter which ”for moral elevation, for
richness and comprehensiveness, for beauty and felicity of exPreSSion,

has been the admiration of the Church in all ages. "7‘

 

lJohn Short, "Exposition of First Corinthians, " The Interpreter's
Bible: The Holy Scriptures in the King James and Revised Standard
Versions with General Articles and Introduction, Exegesis, Exposition
for Each Book of the Bible. 12 Vols. Editorial Boar? George Arthur
Buttrick, commentary editor, and others (New York: Abingdon-
Cokesbury Press, 1951-1957).

 

 

2Hodge, cited by Christian Friedrich Kling, The First Epistle of
Paul to the Corinthians, ” Johann Peter Lange et al. (eds.) A Commen-
tary of the Holy Scriptures: Critical, Doctrinal 331d Homileti’Cal, , with
fiecial Reference to Ministers and Students. Translated from the German

 

 

and edited, with additions, by Philip Schaff (it a_._1. 25 Vols. (New York:
C. Scribner and Sons Co., 1884-85), Vol. 21, p. 267.

 

 

 

161

It is important that we remember that the old English expression
"charity" employed by the KJV is a poor rendering of the Greek agape.
This word does not occur in the writings of any of the pagans and seems
to have been chosen purposely by Paul in contrast to the usual terms
employed for love which currently carried connotations of sensual
passion or at best the affection between close relatives.

For it should not be forgotten that agape is a word born within

the bosom of revealed religion: it occurs in the Septuagint

(2 Sam xiii: 15; Cant ii:4: Jer ii:2) and in the Apocrypha

(Wisdom iii: 9); but there is no“ trace of it in any heathen writer
whatever, and as little in Philo or Josephus; the utmost they
attain to here is philanthroPia and philadelphia, and the last

never in any sense but as the love between brethren in blood. . . .

 

 

 

The "love" of which Paul Speaks embraces as its objects both God
and man. It is in no sense synonymous with our modern under standing
of "charity. " Paul's very depreciation of almsgiving in v3 proves this.

But What the Apostle here speaks of, is not any one particular
virtue or grace, but that which is the root and Spring of all
virtues and graces, and which to possess is to be both like God
and in God. . . . Paul here exhibits to us love after the manner
of a jeweller handling the most precious gem of his cabinet,
turning it on every Side, shewing it in varied lights, and holding
it up to view in a way best fitted to awaken desire for its
possession. 2

It is readily perceived that this ode has three divisions, namely
the necessity of love, an analysis of love, the permanence of love.
There is climax throughout as the Apostle first sets forth the worth of
love negatively by contrast with other gifts, then it is set forth positively
as it is passed through a verbal prism separating and throwing into full

relief its shining rays, and finally contrast is again employed to

 

1Richard Chenevix Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament
(London: Macmillan and Co., 1880), pp. 43-44.

zKling, Lange's Commentary, vol. 21, p. 267.

 

ii-eiat'e it
11 the C0

3:3 sou

ESSETtiOI
fiber 1:
Ether ta
Ehaude,
£313? cot;

ithe de:

Sin

figs, am

Bilected .-

ifjfe. E

P n
‘ igurlnth

162

demonstrate that love will never fail but endure forever with a
permanence transcending all else that we here know. Each phrase is
wonderfully apposite, for the features selected as characteristic of
love are mainly those in which the Corinthians had shown themselves
defective.

When Paul asserts that "love envieth not, " he employs a word
zaloun which denotes the manifestation of unpleasant feelings in. views
of the advantages of others, causing schism and strife, the very ills
to which the first part of this letter makes reference. Similarly when
he points out that "love vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, " doth not
behave itself unseemly, ” we cannot help being reminded of the braggarts
in the Corinthian church who professed "we all have knowledge" and
who sought to find in every church service an opportunity for self-
display. The ills of. the church to which Paul makes these slanting
allusions had grown out of the characteristics of the city in which it
was located, and Corinth was notorious for its intellectual pride, and
moral vanity. I

Again when Paul declares that ”love seeketh not her own, " his
assertion appropriately rebukes the Spirit of litigation referred to
earlier in chapter six when he had asked the questions "Why do ye not
rather take wrong? Why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be
defrauded? " These Christian brethren who were taking one another to
court could have had no more effective rebuke than this Slight reference
in the description of love.

Similarly when Paul shows that love transcends prophecy, knowl-
edge, and the gift of tongues by virtue of its permanence, he unerringly
selected for his contrast the gifts most esteemed by those to whom he
wrote. Here we have further evidence of the unity of theme of

1 Corinthians. For example, concerning the knowledge and wisdom

163

mentioned in verses eight and nine, at the commencement of the

letter he had concisely summarised distinctive Jewish and Greek
characteristics by saying ”For the Jews require a Sign and the GREEKS
SEEK AFTER WISDOM. " Because Paul aims to diSparage mere human
wisdom and puny man's pride, he boldly declares to these Greeks that:

. . . it is written I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and
will being to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where
is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the diSputer of this
world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew
not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save
them that believe. . . . God hath chosen the foolish things of
the world to confound the wise. . . . That no flesh should glory
in his presence. But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God
is made unto us wisdom . . . That, according, as it is written,
He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. " 1: 19-31

Again in chapter 2 we read:

For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus
Christ, and him crucified . . . And my Speech was not with
enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the
Spirit and of power: that your faith should not stand in the
wisdom of men, but in the power of God. . . .

Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's
wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth . . . But
the natural man rec eiveth not the things of the Spirit of God:
for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them,
because they are spiritually discerned. 2:2, 4, 5, l3, 14.

In chapter 8 with some irony Paul declares further:

Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all
have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth.
And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth
nothing yet as he ought to know. But if any man love God, the
same is known of him. vs 1, 2.

If these verses are compared with 1 Cor 13, the unity of thought is
apparent. In the analysis of love the Apostle declared that love em-
braced humility; it was "not puffed up. " Previously he had written

as above that “knowledge puffeth up. " In the same context as the latter

 

N.

164

statement were the words ”if any man think that he knoweth anything,
he knoweth nothing yet. . . . " In the 13th chapter he says the same
thing in another way. "For we know in part . . . For now we see
through a glass, darkly . . . Thus the Apostle displays the pre-
eminence of love by declaring that our boasted knowledge is partial.
Even complete knowledge of a part is here impossible, for this cannot
be until the full relation of the part to the whole is understood and this
latter requires full knowledge of the whole itself which is now
impossible.

The appositeness of the Apostle's analysis of love to the conditions
in the Corinthian church has been pointed out, and also the unity of
thought discernible between this chapter and the preceding ones as
manifested by the allusions to knowledge. Thirdly it should be stated
that this very emphasis on love is not here for the first time introduced,
but rather here it appears climactically, crowning previous references

to the same healing virtue. According to The Interpreter's Bible,

 

"in almost every chapter love is elevated as the true mark of the new
life. "1 A few references will make this apparent. In the third chapter,
for example, Paul declares that the absence of love proves the Christian
immaturity of the schismatics.

For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is amongyou envying,
and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?
v. 3

Again in ch 8 v 1 .
Knowledge puffeth up, but charity [agapé] edifieth.
And in the final chapter:
Let all your things be done with charity. 16:14

1Clarence Tucker Craig, "Introduction to the First Epistle to the
Corinthians, " The Interpreter's Bible, Vol. 10, p. 10.

 

 

 

 

165

There is another reason why this chapter is remarkable for its
cogency. It is likely that the Corinthians discerned that Paul was
here drawing the portrait of a Person and not merely of a virtue.
Throughout the letter he had appealed to their love for Christ and
Christ's love for them as the supreme motive in holy living. When he
rebuked them for their schisms, he had appealed by saying:

Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus
Christ, that ye all Speak the same thing. . . . Is Christ divided?
. . . . of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto
us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemp-
tion. 1:10, 13, 30

Likewise, Paul had declared that his one theme in preaching was
Christ.

For 1 determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus
Christ. 2:2

In the third chapter he asserts that there can be only one foundation
for character building:

For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is
Jesus Christ. v 11

When Paul would urge the believers to forsake their vices, he adjures
them

Purge out therefore the old leaven . . . For even Christ our
pas sover is sacrificed for us. 5:7

To incline the Corinthians towards a more loving attitude to each other
Paul informs them that to Sin against the brethren was to "sin against
Christ. " 8:12. Even the "weak brother” is one "for whom Christ died. ”
v 11 They are assured that they are the "very "body of Christ, and
members in particular. " 12:27

Thus does Paul motivate through the person of Christ throughout.

Does he swerve from this pattern in the thirteenth chapter?

166

This hymn in praise of love is of importance with regard
to the question of St. Paul's personal knowledge of Jesus Christ.
It is too often forgotten that Saul of Tarsus was a contemporary
of our Lord, and the tendency of historical criticism at the
present time is to place the date of Saul's conversion not very long
after the Ascension. Furrer and Clemen would argue for this.
Saul may not have been in Jerusalem at the time of the Crucifixion
and Resurrection; but he would have abundant means of getting
evidence at first hand about both, after the Appearance on the
road to Damascus had made it imperative that he should do so; and
some have seen evidence of exact knowledge of the life and char-
acter of Jesus of Nazareth in this marvellous analysis of the nature
and attributes of Love. We have only, it is said, to substitute
Jesus for Love throughout the chapter, and St. Paul's panegyric
”becomes a simple and perfect description of the historic Jesus”
(The Fifth GOSpel, p. 153). Intellect was worshipped in Greece,
and power in Rome; but where did St. Paul learn the surpassing
beauty of love? "It was the life of love which Jesus lived which
made the psalm of love which Paul wrote possible" (ibid. ).1

 

The Interpreter's Bibleztakes a similar position by saying "It is natural

 

to feel that some person must have sat for this portrait. "

This one brief chapter has done more for mankind than the whole
of pagan literature. It cannot be overemphasized that love was not a
pagan virtue.. The Apostle had even to coin a rare word to express his
thought. The ancients prized wisdom and physical and mental prowess,
but they knew almost nothing of the qualities embodied in Christian love.
.If this one ideal had been Paul's only contribution to men in this discourse,
the latter would remain one of the most influential addresses ever
delivered. This ideal has been reSponSible for the entire transformation
of the cruel and barbaric ancient culture of the Roman world. Today

it is acknowledged in theory at least that the pattern set forth in

 

1Archibald Robertson and Alfred lenmer, A Critical and Exe-
getical Commentary on the First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians,
—The International Critical Commentary on the Holj Scriptures of the Old
and New Testament, edited by S. D. Driver e_t a1. (Edinburgh: T 81 T
Clark, 1950), p. 286. "'

zJohn Short, "Exposition of the First Epistle to the Corinthians, "
The Interpreter's Bible, Vol. 10, p. 167.

 

 

 

 

 

fill,

in

kJ'

 

 

167

1 Corinthians 13 is the most ennobling concept by which all men and
nations can shape their conduct.

One more of many possible facets Should be pointed out. This
is the delicate tact wherewith Paul refrained from writing "Though YOU
speak with the tongues of men or of angels. . . " and "now YOU know
in part. . . ” He chose rather to use the first person here. "Though;
Speak with the tongues of men and of angels and have not charity _1_ am
become as sounding brass and a tinkling cymbal."

In the following chapter the subject of Spiritual gifts is concluded.
In chapter twelve Paul had used the human body as an illustration of
the Christian church. In chapter thirteen he had shown that the principle
which was to quicken and govern that body is the principle of love. In
the present chapter the application of this principle is shown to be in
the selective and judicious use of those Spiritual gifts which are helpful
to the entire church body.

Thus in the first part of the next exhortation Paul points out that
pr0phesying or inspired preaching is better than the use of tongues both
as regards‘the church members and unbelievers (VS 1-25). He argues
as follows:

For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue Speaketh not unto
men, but unto God; for no man understandeth him. . . But he
that pr0phesieth Speaketh unto men to edification, and exhor-
tation, and comfort. He that Speaketh in an unknown tongue
edifieth himself; but he that pr0phesieth edifieth the church.

For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare
himself to the battle? So likewise ye, except ye utter by the
tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what
is Spoken? for ye shall Speak into the air.

. . . in the church I had rather speak five words with my under-
standing, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten
thousand words in an unknown tongue. Brethren, be not children
in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in under-
standing be men. vs 2, 3, 8, ‘9, 19, 20.

   

168

In the next section Paul suggests regulations for the orderly exercise
of these particular gifts in church gatherings. His primary argument
here is that "God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in
all the churches of the saints. " v 33. Thirdly, Paul admonishes the
Corinthian women not to bring disgrace upon the church by apparently
seeking to assert their equality in Christ by means of contradicting
the men in the meeting. Finally he declares in an admirable summary:
"Let all things be done decently and in order. " v 40.

By means of this chapter the Apostle has argued that just as
it is love which gives value to general character and conduct so it is
love which directs in the proper use of Spiritual gifts.

Having treated of various social, moral, ecclesiastical, and
liturgical questions, the Apostle now takes up a doctrinal one,
which he has kept to the last because of its vital importance.
The Epistle begins with the subject of Christ Crucified (1:13-
2:5); it ends with that of Christ Risen (xv). 1

Calvin made a suggestion in this connection which may throw
light on Paul's ability as an artist in speech construction. He declares
that Paul purposely sought to bring the Corinthians to a correct state of
mind by means of his rebukes and exhortations before he discussed the
momentous subject of the resurrection, the only part of the message
dealing with doctrine, and that doctrine a keystone of the evangel
preached by Paul.2

The following is a precis of the argument of the fifteenth chapter.

The substance of my preaching has been and is the historical
fact of the Resurrection of Christ, which was predicted in
Scripture, and is vouched for by competent witnesses, most of
whom are still living. Among these are the other Apostles

 

1Robertson and Plummer, pp. 328-329.
Z1pm., p. 328.

169

and myself; and greatly as they differ from me in calling and
work, we are absolutely agreed about this.
vs 1-11

How is it that, in the face of this Apostolic proclamation,

some people go about and declare that a resurrection of dead
people is impossible; thus making Apostolic preaching to be

a lie, and your faith to be a delusion, and the condition of dead
Christians to be quite hopeless, and the condition of living
Christians to be pitiable in the extreme?

But they are quite wrong; for Christ has risen, and therefore
resurrection is for us certain. For in this matter Christ is
the first sheaf of a vast harvest; and when He has conquered
all that opposes Him, including death itself, then, as the Son
of God, He will yield up everything to His Father, and God
will be supreme.

Baptism for the sake of the dead would lose all its mean—
ing, and Christian self-sacrifice would lose most of its
inspiration and comfort, if there were no resurrection and no

future life.
vs 1 2-34

Pe0p1e ask how the body that dies and the body that is
raised can be the same. Nature itself shows that there is no
necessity for their being the same. The seed and the plant
that rises from it are so far from being the same, that the
one must die in order that the other may live. Even between
bodies that are material there are endless possibilities of
difference; and not all bodies are material. There may be
immense differences, yet real relationship, between the body
that dies and the body that is raised. Scripture confirms this.

The transformation of the material body that dies into a
glorified body that will not die is not only possible, but
necessary and certain; and hence the completeness of the victory
over Death.

With this certainty before you, be steadfast, working in
sure hope of eternal life. vs 35-58 1
Thus the chapter has three major sections. (1) The Resurrection of

Christ is the foundation of the G08pel, 1-11. (2) Christ's resurrection

 

1Robertson and Plummer, pp. 330, 343-344, 365-366.

170

is both the type and guarantee of the resurrection of all who believe
in Him, 12-34. (3) Objections to the doctrine considered, 35-58.

In the first section Paul affirms that the GOSpel is not a set of
abstractions or a system oftruths deduced by reason but rather it
is a summary of historical events concerning Christ and their Sig-
nificance for all believers. He declares that the Old Testament had
foretold the resurrection of the One who would atone for the sins of
the world and that at the time of his writing there were nearly 500
believers still living who had witnessed the fulfillment of the ancient
prophecy, and who had actually seen the risen Christ.

Secondly, Paul points out that but for these facts the faith of
the Corinthians, and of all other Christians, was actually farcical.
He argues from the starting point of the heresy he combats by saying:

But if there be no resurrection of‘ the dead, then is Christ

not risen: And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching
vain, and your faith is also vain. . . . ye are yet in your sins.
Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.
If in this life only we have hOpe in Christ, we are of all men
most ‘m'iSerabl'efl vs l3, 14, 17-19.

This series of enthymemes leads to a set of negative conclusions, but
the succeeding set are positive in character.

But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the first-
fruits of them that Slept. For since by man came death, by
man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam
all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every
man in his own order: Christ the first-fruits; afterward they
that are Christ's at his coming. vs 20-23

In the third section of the chapter he moves from cause and effect
arguments to ones derived from analogy. He draws analogies between
the resurrected body and the new plant from a buried seed; "the dif-
ferent nature of the Spiritual resurrected body from the present
physical body is analogous to the already apparent differences existing

between earthly and heavenly bodies; and an analogy exists between

 

   

171

the first and second Adams, the second Adam being Christ as the
Head of the new race.

The _most magnificent passage to be found in that chapter is
the peroration to this section found in verses 51-55.

Behold, I Show you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we
shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye,
at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead
shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For
this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must
put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on
incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality,
then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death
is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting?

O grave, where is thy victory?

There is an interesting contrast to be noted in Paul's argument
for eternal life and the customary arguments for immortality which
existed in his day. He says nothing of the Platonic idea of an in-
destructible soul which consciously lives on beyond the death of the

body. According to the Interpreter's Bible--

 

Of one thing we may be sure, Paul did not believe that man
was by nature immortal. Participation in the life of the age
to come depended on God's act of raising the dead. I

The Greek attitude towards such a belief is indicated by the reSponse
of the Athenians to the Mars Hill sermon which had referred to the
resurrection. "And when they heard of the resurrection of the dead,
some mocked: and others said, We will hear thee again of this
matter. " Acts 17:32. This is evidence that Paul's arguments were
not chosen merely with the purpOse of currying favour through the
adoption of popular views.

The fifteenth chapter of 1 Corinthians is the true conclusion to

this message of the Apostle. That which follows is merely a number

 

lCraig, "Introduction to the First Epistle to the Corinthians”
The Interpreter's Bible, Vol. 10, p. 12.

 

172

of addendums comprising exhortations regarding subsidiary matters,

and salutations and good wishes.

Analysis of Pathos

 

What Shall we say concerning the pathetic appeal of this epistle?
Here as with all Paul's messages, there is no instance of emotion
being used for emotion's sake. Each appeal to the feelings grows
naturally out of the significance of the logical arguments presented.
When he would rebuke party spirit, he argues that the so-called
leaders of the different parties had not been the founders of Christianity.
He asks "IS Christ divided- was Paul crucified for you? " Certainly
here is an appeal to the feelings, but it is an appeal that Springs from
the logic involved. 1 Corinthians 13 likewise appeals to the heart, but
it is also a well-reasoned analytical presentation of a principle which
Paul felt could solve the problems of the church he addressed. In the
’ fifteenth chapter also many of the assertions have a strong pathetic
appeal.

If Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your
sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are
perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are
of all men most miserable. vs 17-19

If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus,
what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? let us eat and
drink; for tomorrow we die. v 32 '

He verges on the poetic when in exultation he cries--

So when this corruptible Shall have put on incorruption, and
this mortal shall have put on immortality, then Shall be
brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed
up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where
is thy victory? vs 54, 55

The emotional appeal in each of these verses naturally issues from

the momentous significance of the theme with which he grapples; and

 

173

the conclusions he draws from reasoned argument. He is appealing to
self-preservation as manifested by the inherent desire in most men's
hearts for immortality.

What evidence is there that Paul particularly adapted his Speech
to the audience he had in mind? Can any evidence be found that indi-
cates his skill in contriving to put his listeners in a frame of mind
suitable for the receptions of his ideas ?

When we read the first nine verses of the letter, we find nothing to
indicate that this church is anything other than a model church. He
addresses "the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are
sanctified in Christ Jesus, " and declares “I thank my God always on your
behalf, for the grace of God which is given you by Jesus Christ; that
in everything ye are enriched by him, in all utterance, and in all
knowledge. . . . " There is nothing of attack in his first words, but very
much to remind the church of their privileges and of the Apostle's love
and care towards them. When his rebuke commences, it is by means of
the pricking of conscience rather than sledge hammer blows of reproof.
With a series of questions he emphasizes the nature of the unity of the
body of Christ. He appeals to his own conduct among them as an example
that the objective of the gOSpel was to unify men in Christ, not to create
in them the spirit of partisanship.

One of the schismatic groups had called itself after the name of
Apollos, described as one who was wonderfully eloquent. To meet this,
Paul declares that when he had presented the gosPel to them, it had been
in Simplicity, without the customary flourishes of the professional orators
of this age of the second sophistic.

And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of
Speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God.

For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus
Christ, and him crucified. And I was with you in weakness, and in
fear, and in much trembling. And my Speech and my preaching

 

 

\w / 175

was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstra-
tion of the Spirit and of power. 2: 1-41

Both aSpectS of Paul's introductory appeal to the Corinthians,
the references to Christ's behaviour and of his own at the time of the
conversion of the Corinthians were calculated to remind them of their
most sacred memories. George Campbell once wrote that persuasion
has its "marvellous efficacy in rousing the passions, and by some
secret, sudden, and inexplicable association, awakening all the tenderest
emotions of the heart. “2 Certainly Paul's references to the crucifixion
of Christ and his initial proclamation of that event to the Corinthians
were provocative of the tenderest emotions. When we discover that
there is not one page of the record of this message that does not refer to
Christ, it becomes apparent that the sacred name was intended to be the

most powerfully motivating force that could be invoked.3

 

Thus when Paul desires to persuade them against honoring one
leader above another, he does not content himself with pointing out that
all were but instruments in God's hand, and that "neither is he that
planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the

increase. " He must continue by saying:

 

1As will be noted in a later section, this passage has considerable
ethical appeal. '

zGeorge Campbell, Philosophy of Rhetoric, cited by Thonssen and
Baird, Speech Criticism, p. 375.

 

 

3It is recognized that motive appeals and appeals to emotions are
not strictly synonymous. However, as Glen E. Mills has written: . . .
motivation has an effective "core" of feeling tones, such as likes, dis-
likes, interests, preferences, and others. . . . when situations matter
to us, we experience feelings; and .when they matter a great deal, we
have strong emotional reactions. " Composing the Speech (New York:
Prentice-Hall, 1952), pp. 192-193. F

In the present instance of Paul's references to Christ and to his
own preaching concerning Christ both appeals to emotions and motive
appeals are involved. The Apostle appeals to the emotions of love and
gratitude, and invokes the motive of religious sentiment. As Mills has
said, an apt motive appeal will often cause an emotional reaction.

 

176

Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours;
whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life,
or death, or things present, or things to come; all are your's;
and ye are Christ‘s; and Christ is God's. 3:7, 21-23

Here is appeal to a whole gamut of emotions including gratitude, con-
tentment, and joy. The motives touched upon number among them self-
preservation, property, power, reputation, and the affections. Paul

has asserted that all things and all people are for the ultimate benefit

of the true Christian, that he shares the ownership of things material

and spiritual, temporal and eternal, and that God loves him so much

as to guarantee his present and his future. Even death will mean advantage
for the believer. Where else can we find an example of so comprehensive
pathetic appeal in such short compass?

In the following chapter we have examples of indignant reproof,
irony, sarcasm, and satire. Each of these can prove a dangerous weapon
unless handled with great skill. Often they offend rather than win.
However, as Neander has said: "The conceit of a narrow-minded bigotry
can best be attacked with irony and sarcasm. " Coming so obviously from
one who deeply loved them, this message aroused in the Corinthians the
feelings of Shame and repentance. We know from 2 Cor 7:8-12 that the
Corinthians took no offense and that reformation was accomplished by
the Apostle's rebuke.

Typical of his emotional but meaningful rebuke is the following
passage:

For who sees anything different in you? What have you that you
did not receive? If then you received it, why do you boast as if
it were not a gift?

Already you are filled'. Already you have become rich!
Without us you have become kings! And would that you did reign,
so that we might Share the rule with you'. For I think that God
has exhibited us apostles as last of all, like men sentenced to
death; because we have become a Spectacle to the world, to angels
and to men. We are fools for Christ's sake, but you are wise in

177

. Christ. We are weak, but you are strong. You are held in
honor, but we in disrepute. To the present hour we hunger and
thirst, we are ill-clad and buffeted and homeless, and we labor,
working with our own hands. When reviled, we bless; when
persecuted, we endure; when slandered, we try to conciliate;
we have become, and are now, as the refuse of the world, the
offscouring of all things.

I do not write this to make you ashamed, but to admonish
you as my beloved children. For though you have countless guides
in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your
father in Christ Jesus through the gosPel. I urge you, then, be
imitators of me. 1 Cor. 4:7-l6 RSV

Paul so vividly contrasts his position with that of the Corinthians that
only those completely devoid of sensitivity would not have been struck
with shame and self-reproach.

The strongest of motives approPriate to their case is applied to
' these early Christians by Paul. When in ch 5 he bids them to excommuni-
cate those who persisted in immorality, it is in order "that the Spirit may
be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. " When he warns them against
litigation, it is with the reminder that one day "the saints shall judge
the world" and that therefore surely small church differences should now
be easily settled among them. "I speak to your shame, " declares Paul.
"IS it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that
shall be able to judge between his brethren? " In warning against licenti-
ousness, he reminds them that the body of every believer "is the temple
of the Holy Ghost. " "Furthermore" says he, "ye are bought with a
price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are
God's. " v 20

To impress his point that believers strong in faith are to be careful
of wounding the weaker consciences of their brethren, the Apostle
characterises each of the latter as a brother "for whom Christ died. "
And he adds, "But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their

weak conscience, ye sin against Christ. " 8:11, 12. To impress his

178

point he even indulges in strong hyperbole. ”Wherefore, if meat make
my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest
Imake my brother to offend. " v 13.

Another instance of Paul‘s choice of emotive words is his reference
to the famed national . athletics of Greece. The city of Corinth was
within a day's journey of the famous Mt. Olympus, where the Greek
games were held, regularly uniting Greeks from all over the peninsula.
Paul takes this into account when he likens the Christian life to the course
of the Greek athlete competing in the Olympian races.

Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth
the prize? So run, that ye may obtain. And every man that
striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do

it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible. I there-
fore so run, not as uncertainly; so fight I, not as one that beateth
the air; but I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection:

lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself
should be a castaway. 1 Cor 9: 24-27

Here is colorful language, picturing in terms of familiar scenes
the truths he desired to convey. As a skilled orator Paul is not content
with proving. His design is to n_m__v_e as well as to convince, and to this
end he employs such picturesque imagery aS the different building
materials mentioned in chapter 3, and such figures as this one of the
Olympic runner. 1

Other examples of emotional proof have been referred to in the
tracing of the argument of the epistle. For example, it was pointed out
that not until he had softened his hearers and prepared their hearts did
Paul present the doctrine that was most upon his heart to convey, that

of the resurrection. We have seen also that the ode to love was more

than an analysis of a virtue, it contained skillfully appropriate references

 

1”The abundance of adjectives, the pictorial effect, and the appeal
to imagery contribute in no small measure" to emotional value, accord-
ing to Thonssen and Baird, p. 372.

179

to the behaviour. of the Corinthians, and these are made in such a way
as to seek to convict the consciences and win the hearts of his hearers.l

However, it Should be pointed out that perhaps the strongest phase
of pathetic appeal in this address is that which is wedded also to ethical
appeal, namely the revelation of Paul's own love for those to whom he
spoke. In 1 Corinthians 2:4 he described his attitude in the former
message. "For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote unto
you with many tears; not that ye should be grieved, but that ye might
know the love which I have more abundantly unto you. " These tears were
implied by the fervid exhortations of the Apostle, and possibly these
were as much reSponsible for the success of the letter as the logical
arguments employed. That the epistle was successful is proved by the
reference in a later letter to the reception of the former.

For though I made you sorry with a letter, I do not repent, though

I did repent: for I perceive that the same epistle hath made you
sorry, though it were but for a season. Now I rejoice, not that

ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance; for ye
were made sorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive
damage by-us in nothing. ‘For godly sorrow worketh repentance to
salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh
death. For behold this selfsame thing, that ye sorrowed after a
godly sort, what carefulness it wrought in you, yea, what clearing
of yourselves, yea, what indignation, yea, what fear, yea, what
vehement desire, yea, what zeal, yea what revenge'. In all things
ye have approved yourselves to be clear in this matter. 2 Cor 7:8-11

 

lPaul aimed at convicting the Corinthians of their error in magnify-
ing those gifts involving public diSplay (such as the gift of tongues) by
his argument concerning the temporary nature of pr0phecy, tongues, and
human knowledge (1 Cor 13:8-13). He endeavoured to win them to his own
way of thinking by the striking description of the less-esteemed gift of
love. This description is so evidently a portrayal also of the Incarnate
Son of God that the emotions of reverence, gratitude, and affection
were probably aroused in the auditors.

...

II!

 

 

d
.

\-

 

 

 

180

Here is a list of the emotions evoked by the address we have been
studying. These included sorrow, indignation, fear, desire to reform,
religious zeal, etc. This subsequent record of the results of the letter
suggests that the Apostle skillfully adapted his message to the particular
situation of the recipients, and that he effectively plucked the requisite

strings of pathos .

Analysis of Ethos

 

When we turn our consideration to the ethical appeal to be found in
1 Corinthians, we discover that this also, as with the pathetic appeal,
is interwoven with the whole message. It is not a thing apart from the
logical arguments of the Apostle or from his emotional expressions.
Evidences of Paul's competence, high character, and good will have
already been discovered in the tracing of the expression of his ideas in
this epistle. His arguments were appropriate, dignified and lofty, and
lovingly set forth. Nevertheless some underlining is called for in the
following paragraphs.

The arguments of Ie_1_:_l_1_o_s_are not here confined to evidences implicit
in the argurnents'and appeals of 1 Corinthians. Rather the Apostle refers
the church back to the Significance of his own behaviour when among
them years before. He reminds them that at that time he appeared "in
weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling. " Then regarding his
preaching, he alleges "my Speech and my preaching was not with enticing
words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power. "
(1 Cor 2:3, 4). Concerning his conduct he says:

For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant
unto all," that I might gain the more. And unto the Jews I became
as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the
law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the
law, to them ,that are without law, as without law, (being net with-
out law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them

181

that are without law. To the weak became I as weak, that I
might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I
might by all means save some. 1 Cor 9:19-22

He further reminds them that although he had every right to claim their
financial support, he had not done so.

Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live

of the things of the temple? . . . Even so hath the Lord ordained
that they which preach the gospel should live of the gOSpel. But
I have used none of these things: neither have I written these
things, that it should be so done unto me. . . . 1 Cor 8: 13-15

Because of such irreproachable behavior when among them, Paul
feels justified in calling upon the believers to follow his example. Thus
we read such verses as the following:

For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved
son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance
of my ways which be in Christ, as I teach everywhere. in every
church. 1 Cor 4:17

Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ. 1 Cor 11:1

Yet in the church I had rather Speak five words with my under-
standing, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten
thousand words in an unknown tongue. 1 Cor 14:19

These statements, when linked with the evidence affoflded by his
emphasis on the virtues of faith, hope and love, indicate the high
character of the Apostle. Frequently the revelation is made by remarks
which seem ahnost asides. For example, he is quite ready to declare
that he, the planter of the church, is nothing, while God is everything (3:7).
Also he is not reluctant to include himself as among those who "belong"
to the Corinthians for their benefit. He affirms that he is not aware of
misconduct on his part, but nevertheless only the Judgment day will
fully reveal his heart (4:3).

The description in ch 4:9-15 is particularly strong in the elements
of ethical appeal. He pictures himself and his fellow workers as

"appointed to death, " "Fools for Christ's sake, " "deSpised, " and "made

182

a spectacle unto the world. . . . "

Even unto this present hour we both hunger, and thirst, and are
naked, and are buffeted, and have no certain dwelling-place; and
labour, working with our own hands; being reviled, we bless;
being persecuted, we suffer it: being defamed, we intreat: we
are made as the filth of the world, and are the offscouring of all
things unto this day.

This is a picture painted with broad deft strokes that has few
equals in literature or oratory for its delineation of a sublime Spirit.

Despite his humility, Paul does assert his competence by his
claims as Christ's Apostle. This claim appears in the first sentence of
1 Corinthians. Again in 9: 1-5 he urges the same claim in answer to his
critics. In 4: 15 he suggests that his authority should be apparent to the
Corinthians inasmuch as he it was who brought them the gospel.

For though ye have ten thousand instructers in Christ, yet have
ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you
through the gospel.

Such passages as 3:6 and 9:2 express the same thought. The latter is
particularly forthright. "If I be not an apostle unto others, yet doubtless

I am to you: for the seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord. " In
discussing the Lord' Supper, he claims that he received from Christ
Himself the account of the institution, (11:23). Similarly in arguing for

the resurrection, Paul asserts that he also beheld the risen Lord, referring
to his experience on the Damascus road (15:8). When giving counsel con-
cerning marriage, he affirms on four occasions that his advice is prompted
by the Spirit of God (7: 10, 12, 25, 40). 2 Cor. 2:4 indicates how good—

will for the Corinthians permeated his entire message to them.

For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote unto you
with many tears; not that ye Should be grieved, but that ye might
know the love which I have more abundantly unto you.

Every chapter expresses in some way or other the Spirit reflected in his

closing words of this letter. "My love be with you all in Christ Jesus. "

183

This love is identical with that described in the 13th chapter, and the
Corinthians possessed in the earnest warnings of their Spiritual father
the evidence in him of a "love which suffered long and was kind, which
envied not, vaunted not itself and was not puffed up, sought not her own,

was not easily provoked, and hoped all things. "

Analysis of Arrangement

 

We would nowiask the following questions concerning 1 Corinthians.
Do the various parts of this address combine to make an orderly and
balanced whole? IS the plan of arrangement particularly accommodated
to the audience situation? Can the emergence of a central theme be
traced?

It has been impossible to analyze the ideas in this epistle without
tresPassing somewhat upon these other matters of arrangement. For
example, the last question above was answered when the theme of
1 Corinthians 13 was shown to be the basic one of the epistle. Paul's
great aim in dealing with the practical moral disorders of this church
was to instruct them to apply comprehensive principles to solve every
question of conduct. Rather than entrusting to them a multitude of‘rules
regarding minutia of duty, he had emphasized such absolute principles
as (1) Whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God. 1 Cor 10:31, and
(2) Let all things be done with love. 1 Cor 16:14. The key word of
the address is 'love' which appears twel'ye. times, and which is translated
"charity" in the KJV. Even the doctrinal message of the resurrection
aims at the same target as the Apostle's insistence upon love. The
fifteenth chapter concludes its closely reasoned argument with this
exhortation: "Therefore my beloved brethren, be ye steadfast, unmove-
able, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know

that your labour is not in vain the Lord. " 1 Cor 15:58. Thus in both the

184

practical and doctrinal sections Paul strives to motivate them to holy
living. There is obviously present here the unity of theme and purpose
which characterizes almost all great Speeches, and which is essential
for adequate arrangement.
As we consider the plan of arrangement, it must be kept in mind
that the Apostle did not have entirely a free hand in choosing the subjects
of his discourse. The church itself had provided many of these for him
by their several questions in their letter to him. There are six major
divisions in this epistle, and the problem-solution method is the mode of
diSposition.
(l) The introduction with its customary salutation accompanied by
an expression of thanksgiving and hope. 1:1-9

(2) Urgent issues demanding immediate resolution. 1:10- 6:20
This section deals with the current schisms, immorality,
and litigation.

(3) Replies to the enquiries of the church regarding marriage and
food offered to idols. 7: 1.. 11:1.

(4) The Disorders associated with public worship. 1:2-l4z40
In this section is discussed the disorderly behaviour of some
Corinthian women during divine service, the laxity of conduct
in connection with the Lord's Supper, and the misuse of
spiritual gifts such as Tongues.

(5) Doctrinal section dealing with the resurrection of the dead. 15:1-58

(6) Final admonitions, counsel, and farewell. 16:1-24.

The Plan of the Epistle is very clear. One is seldom in doubt

as to where a section begins and ends, or as to what the subject

is. There are occasional digressions, or what seem to be such,

as the statement of the great Principle of Forbearance (ix: 1-27),

or the Hymn in praise of Love (xiii), but their connexion with

the main argument of the section in which they occur is easily seen.

 

l

 

1Robertson and Plummer, xxiv.

 

 

E

 

  

11
.

u.

4:

 

n
”r

 

185

A cursory review of the contents of the epistle will make its
sequence apparent. In the introductory nine verses Paul praises the
church for what progress it had made in the new life, and expresses the
hope that this progress will continue till the end. Then he states posi-
tively what should be their condition of unity. "Now I beseech you,
brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all Speak the
same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be
perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. "

v 10. This one verse summarizes beforehand what is to be the theme
of the next four chapters.

He proceeds to recount that he has heard from visitors to Ephesus
of the party spirit and divisions now agitating the church. He points out
that this failurerhas grown out of an inordinate estimate of mere human
wisdom, learning, and eloquence, an estimate entirely inconsistent with
the plan of salvation, and the instruments and methods God had designed
to promulgate the gospel. Only the truly spiritual can discern the true
wisdom, and it is apparent that many of the Corinthians are yet carnal
rather than spiritual.

Next Paul proceeds to point out that church leaders are mere
channels through which God manifests blessing, and that they are not to
be exalted one above another. Furthermore, any one who practices
partisanship thereby does damage to the church of God which is the Temple
of His Holy Spirit. In chapter 4 the Apostle paints the contrast between
the self- sufficient spirit of the Corinthians, and the true condition of the
Apostles. He reminds them that he is their Spiritual father and that it
is to him they should look for counsel and guidance.

Some of this counsel he proceeds to give. The church member
guilty of gross immorality is to be excommunicated and the practice of

litigation must cease. It is better to suffer wrong than to disgrace

 

186

Christianity before heathen tribunals. Christians are to be entirely
separate from the pagans. Particularly in the matter of sexual morality
will the difference be easily discerned, for the Christian will regard

his body as the purchased possession of Christ and as the Temple for
His Spirit.

The latter admonition was a fitting introduction for a study of the
problems associated with marriage and divorce. He proceeds to answer
their questions either by using the commands of Christ or his own advice,
which the Apostle feels originates with the Divine Spirit.

In chapters eight to ten the attitude of the liberal-minded towards
scrupulous believers in matters indifferent is discussed. While Paul
agrees that food offered to idols is not inherently bad, he urges the
liberals to respect the scruples of those with weak consciences and if
necessary forego some of their own rights. AS an example of this he
points out that he himself had practised this attitude when he refrained
from accepting material support from the believers, although he had
every right to such support. Rather than give occasion for some to think
that perhaps the motives of their evangelist were questionable he had
paid his own way in all things. In summary, says Paul, "whether there-
fore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God. " 10:31

This principle is now applied to church behavior. Women are
warned not to presmne upon their equality in Christ but to be subject to
custom. The true mode of celebrating the Lord's Supper is pointed out,
with emphasis upon the need for a loving attitude between the participants.

Some had boastfully exhibited what they claimed to be their particular
Spiritual gift, and the’ Apostle now in the twelfth chapter reviews the pur-
pose of the gifts. These were intended for the edification of all the
believers and not for the glorification of any Single member. Love is to

guide all in the exercise of their talents and each is to remember that

..i-. #4—

 

187

conduct controlled by love is ”a more excellent way" of service than the
manifestation of marvellous powers. The principle of love suggests
certain rules for regulating the use of Spiritual gifts in worship services.

Thus far Paul has dealt with defects in conduct. Now he turns to
a defect in doctrinal knowledge. Some had arisen declaring there was
to be no resurrection of the dead. But, says Paul, the very heart of
the gosPel is the resurrection of Christ and this event was the guarantee
and type of the resurrection of all believers. Otherwise, Christian faith
is vain, and strivings after righteousness are wasted effort, and further-
more the departed dead are lost for ever. Paul continues by discussing
objections to the doctrine and soars into his sublime peroration--

O Death,where is thy sting? 0 Grave, where is thy victory? His main
task accomplished, he descends to the discussion of a few details concern-
ing future church plans, urges them again to let all their conduct be
governed by love, and bids them an affectionate farewell.

Having reviewed the disposition of this particular discourse it
should be stated that not all of Paul's messages are as orderly as this
one. The next discourse, 2 Corinthians, has no such obvious plan and
for a valid reason. Possibly this present letter is the best example of

arrangement among the seven discourses to be studied in this dissertation.

Style

While the discussion of Paul's style is mainly reserved for a special
chapter we would include here one apt quotation regarding the style

manifested in this address.

This Epistle ranks perhaps the foremost of all as to sublimity and
earnest impassioned eloquence. Of the former, the description

of the Simplicity of the GOSPel in ch ii. --the concluding apostrophe
of ch. iii. from vers. 16 to the end--the same in ch vi. from ver. 9
to the end--the reminiscence of the Shortness of the time ch vii.
Z9-31--the whole argument in ch. xv. are examples unsurpassed

 

188

in Scripture itself; and of the latter ch. 8-15, and the whole of
ch. ix. , while the panegyric of love in ch. xiii. stands a pure
and perfect gem, perhaps the noblest assemblage of thoughts
in beautiful language extant in this world. About the whole
Epistle there is a character of lofty and sustained solemnity,
an absence of tortuousness of construction, and an apologetic
plainness. . . . 1

Results

The immediate results of 1 Corinthians are pictured for us in the
following letter, and they are commented upon in our analysis of
2 Corinthians. At this juncture it may suffice to say that the church at
Corinth, upon hearing the message from Paul, sought energetically to

establish lasting reform S .

IV. THE SECOND DISCOURSE TO THE CORINTHIANS

In no other Epistle do we obtain such an insight into the character,
the inner life, the workings of the Apostle's mind and heart.2

Of all the Epistles this is the one which teaches us most of the
Apostle's personality. It enables us, as it were, to lay our
hands upon his breast, and feel the very throbbings of his heart.
If you would know St. Paul as he was, you must study the Epistle
again and yet again.3

We have nowhere else so clear an insight into the character and
life of an apostle. . . We are especially here shown the high moral
and religious Spirit of the Apostle, his self-sacrificing devotion to

 

1Alford, cited by Lange's Commentary, Vol. 21, p. 15.

 

2Henry E. Jacobs et a1. , Annotations on the Epistles of Paul to
1 Corinthians VII-XVI, If'c'arinthians and Galatians. Vol. VIII of The
Lutheran Commentary, edited by Henry E. Jacobs, 12 vols. (New—Tbrk:
The Christian Literature Co. , 1897), p. 159.

 

 

3Farrar, Messages, p. 232.

 

 

189

the welfare of his converts, and the honorable principles which
governed his conduct towards his fellow-laborers. 1

Here, in self-defence, he Opens the most secret recesses of his
heart. We see his keen logic, his nervous excitement, his deep
indignation, his constant self-denial, his strong sense of inde-
pendence, his immeasurable love. We see his sympathy with the
strong combined with his tenderness for the weak; his fire and
passion; his practical good sense and tact; his religious fervour;
his immense devotion to the cause of Christ in which he was ready
to spend and to be spent};

These sample statements from scholars witness to the uniqueness
of the letter we are about to discuss. It is Paul's own Apology for his
life and conduct, and as such it provides the student of rhetoric with
the rare opportunity of seeing an orator's heart and mind, probed as
with a scalpel. Possibly there exist nowhere else in the realms of
literature or oratory, self-revelatory passages equal to those found in

'2 Corinthians. Even such works as The Confessions of St. Augustine are

 

transcended by this Spontaneous discourse, wherein the unveiling is ever
prompted by devotion to an all-absorbing cause. Paul vindicates himself
only in order that the GOSPel of Christ might be rightly esteemed.

Even a cursory reading of this message from Paul demonstrates
that this second address to the Corinthian church is richer in ethical
proof than any other recorded discourse of the Apostle's. It should be
kept in mind, however, that 2 Corinthians is Significant to the rhetorician
not only. because of its emphasis uponethgs, but because this universal
emphasis in Paul's messages finds here its chief exemplification. As the
last chapter of this dissertation will emphasize, ethical argument and
appeal is the distinguishing characteristic of Pauline oratory. Even the
smallest of the Apostle's letters; the Single page to Philemon, bears this

indelible stamp, as will be pointed out in detail in another chapter.

 

VlKling, Lange's Commentary, vol. 21, p. 5.

 

ZFarrar, Messa es, p. 242.

 

 

190

The Occasion

The city and the church of Corinth have already been described
in the introduction to the analysis of 1 Corinthians. Here we must in-
quire--What had taken place in the interlude between the deSpatching
of the two letters? What occasioned Paul to send this second message
so soon after his first? Why did he consider it necessary to enter upon
such a vehement defense of his own character and conduct?

From allusions in this second letter, and from the record in the
book of Acts, the background story can be reconstructed. It is vital
that we Should do so because as one writer has pointed out:

In order to understand the Epistle we must throw ourselves, as
by a mental effort, into the mind and heart of the writer at the
moment when he wrote or, more probably dictated it. 1

In Acts chapter 19 is described the anti-Christian riot which took
place at Ephesus where Paul was preaching daily. It is probably to this
event that he refers when he declares to the Corinthians:

For we would not, brethren have you ignorant of our trouble which
came to us in Asia, that we were pressed out of measure, above
strength, insomuch that we deSpaired even of life: but we had the
sentence of death in ourselves, that we should not trust in our-
selves, but in God which raiseth the dead: who delivered us from
so great a death, and cloth deliver: in whom we trust that he will
yet deliver us. . . 2 Cor 1:8-10

We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed; we are per-
plexed, but not in deSpair; persecuted, but not forsaken; cast
down, but not destroyed; always bearing about in the body the
dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made
manifest in our body. For we which live are always delivered
unto death for Jesus' sake, . . . So then death worketh in us,

. . . 2 Cor 4:8-12

 

1E. H. Plumptre, "The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, "
Ellicott's Commentary on the Whole Bible, 8 vols (Grand Rapids:
ZondervanPublishing House, 1959), Vol. VII, p. 359.

191

Scholars have suggested that certain of the Greek terms found in these
passages indicate that the Apostle was still suffering from severe bodily
injuries probably received during the riot at Ephesus. The word
apokrima used in the phrase ”sentence of death" is related to a cognate
term which Hippocrates had frequently applied to morbid or virulent
secretions. 1 Again it should be noted that the Greek word translated
"dying” ("always hearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus"
4:10) literally means "the state of a corpse. " Where Paul Speaks of

his being "cast down" he employs a military term which frequently was
applied to one incapacitated by a dart or javelin.

The record in Acts declares that Paul was rescued from threatened
death through the devotion of Aquila, Priscilla, and others who were
prepared to risk their own lives in his behalf. He left Ephesus for Troas,
and commenced his work anew. Apparently his preaching in Troas gained
for him many converts, for concerning that experience he declared:

. ”I came to Troas to preach Christ's gOSpel, and a door was Opened unto
me of the Lord. . . " 2 Cor 2:12. Nevertheless, the Apostle did not
tarry long in this Sphere of labour. He adds to the previous statement

the words: "I had no rest in my spirit, because I found not Titus my
brother: but taking my leave of them, I went from thence into Macedonia. ”
v 13. Apparently Titus had been deSpatched to Corinth to ascertain what
had been the reaction of the church to Paul's first letter. He was then

to have returned to Troas to meet Paul. Aware that some new eventuality
must have hindered Titus's early return, the Apostle to the Gentiles
journeyed to Macedonia. Philippi was his most likely destination in that
region, because there he had been instrumental in raising up the first
Christian church in Europe. While we have no record of the event, it
seems probable that it was here that Paul was reunited with his fellow-

labour er .

 

 

192

Judging from the outburst of thanksgiving at the beginning of this
letter, the news of Titus was mainly favourable. The first letter had
done its intended work, and most of the Corinthian believers accepted
Paul's rebukes as merited by them. In his second letter, the Apostle
describes his receipt of the good news.

For when we were come into Macedonia, our flesh had no rest,
but we were troubled on every Side; without were fightings, within
,were fears. Nevertheless God, that comforteth those that are
cast down, comforted us by the coming of Titus; and not by his
coming only, but by the consolation wherewith he was comforted
in you, when he told us your earnest desire, your mourning, your
fervent mind toward me; so that I rejoiced the more. For though
I made you sorry with a letter, I do not repent, though I did re-
pent: for I perceive that the same epistle hath made you sorry,
though it were but for a season. Now I rejoice, not that ye were
made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance: for ye were
made sorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage
by us in nothing. For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salva-
tion not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh
death. . . . I rejoice therefore that I have confidence in you in
all things. 2 Cor 7:5-16

But Titus brought with him other news which was not as acceptable.
A minority party in the church not only refused to repent, but they
attempted to tear in shreds the character and reputation of Paul. With
fanatical zeal they criticised the teachings of the Apostle and denied his
right to be called an Apostle of Christ. Judging from 2 Cor 11:22, this was
a Jewish faction striving to place its own mold upon Corinthian
Christianity.

In this eventuality we have the chief cause of the distinctive nature
of 2 Corinthians. Without the stimulus of this bitter criticism, Paul is
hardly likely to have poured out his soul as here recorded. His attempted
refutation of the calumnies enters into the warp and woof of this letter.

So much is this‘the case, that it is possible to glean from the text approxi-

mately twenty Specific accusations made by the enemies of Paul. These

193

can be categorised as attacks on, (1) his person, (2) his teaching, (3) his
character. Regarding his person they asserted that it was ”base"

(ch 10:1), ”weak" (ch 10: 10), and his speech “contemptible. " (ch 10:10).
Regarding his teaching, his critics declared that he was no true Apostle,
and therefore did not dare to claim financial support from the believers
(1 Cor 9:1-23; 2 Cor 11:7-12; 12:13). Neither the Christ he described,
nor the gospel he offered, was genuine (ch 11:4). He perverted the
Word of God (2:17; 4:2). Furthermore, he exalted self rather than
Christ (4:5).

AS to Paul's character, his detractors affirmed that he had no
letters of reference to commend him (ch 3:1). He was inconstant, for
he had failed to fulfill his announced plan of itinerary, which had promised
the Corinthians a pastoral visit (1:15-17). He was afraid to face those
who now painted him in his true colors (13:3; 10:9-11; 12:20, 21). The
collection Paul was gathering was possibly only a means of filling his
own pockets (12:16-19; 8: 20-23). Finally, the sanity of this so-called
”Apostle" was to be doubted, and his supposed "visions" were mere
fancies (5:13; 11:16-19; 12:6; 12:2; 5:16).1

The following words of the commentator Plumptre aptly suggest
the likely effect upon Paul of such criticisms as outlined above.

Conceive all these barbed arrows of sarcasm falling on the ears,
and through them piercing the very soul, of a man of singularly
sensitive nature, passionately craving for affection, and pro-
portionately feeling the bitterness of loving with no adequate return
(ch 12: 15), and we may form some estimate of the whirl and storm
of emotion in which St. Paul began to dictate the Epistle on which
we are about to enter. Joy, affection, tenderness, fiery indig-
nation, self-vindication, profound thoughts as to the mysteries

of the kingdom of God which flashed upon his soul as he spoke--
all these elements were there, craving to find expression. They
hindered any formal plan and method in the structure of the

 

lFarrar, Messages, pp. 244-245.

194
Epistle. They led to episodes, and Side-glances, and allusive
references without number. 1

Analysis of the Development of Ideas, with
Emphasis Upon Logos

 

 

With our primary interest now focus ed upon the evaluation of
logical content, our objective will be to determine how fully a
given Speech enforces an idea; how closely that enforcement
conforms to the general rules of argumentative development;
and how nearly the totality of the reasoning approaches a
measure of truth adequate for purposes of action. 2

. . . according to the Dewey formula, the Speaker's logical
capacities are estimated in the light of (1) his recognition of

the problem which, at the moment, is disturbing or is about

to disturb the status quo; (2) his analysis of the nature and hear-
ing of the problem upb-n—the social setting; (3) his fertility of
mind in suggesting ideas relevant to the solution of the difficulty;
(4) his acuteness in examining, through reasoning, the impli-
cations of his suggestions; and (5) the verification of his judgment
following the acceptance of the most feasible solution.3

The above quotations suggest canons whereby to test the quality of
Paul's ideas as expressed in 2 Corinthians. However, because the
particular problem under consideration is the reverse of being abstract
or impersonal, we Shall look not only for the elements described above,
but also for considerable warmth of expression. Entire objectivity here,
on Paul's part, would not only be impossible; it would be ridiculous.

To approach this kind of problem without some warmth of feeling would
be to cast a doubt upon the defense. The Corinthians were very far
from being modern sophisticates absorbed in scientific method.
Therefore, we have no right to anticipate that Paul's arguments will be

those of a scrupulous logician. Instead we could expect that his most

 

lEllicott, Vol. VII, p. 360.

zThonssen and Baird, p. 334.
3Ibid., p. 336.

 

To

 

on

 

195

appropriate logic in this case would be the logic of demonstration
through self revelation rather than that achieved through links in a
chain of reasoning. That which would probably carry most weight with
the individuals he had won to Christ would be a demonstration of his
own sincerity, as far as this was possible in a written message. With
these considerations in mind let us enquire--What content of ideas is
to be found in this epistle? How does the Apostle argue his case?
What are his underlying assumptions ?

The basic premise of the Apostle's entire argument is suggested
at the very commencement. His enemies had suggested that one as
weak, despised, and persecuted as the Apostle, could not be an authorized
ambassador of the great God. Paul reSponds by declaring that all of
God's true servants are disciplined by trials and sufferings. He asserts
that the sufferings of Christ are to be Shared by all true believers, and
that these are a moral discipline designed to lead to the faith and trust
in Divine Providence required of all Christians. Paul adds to this
argument by declaring that suffering safeguards the messengers of the
Most High from the peril of pride, and demonstrates to them that all
their strength comes from God alone. Thus also the flock is taught that
the success of the gosPel is due to divine, and not human, power. Let
us notice Paul's use of this fundamental argument. Immediately after
the salutation, he breaks out in praise:

Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the
Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort; who comforteth us
in all our tribulation, that we may be able to comfort them which
are in any trouble, by the comfort wherewith we ourselves are
comforted of God. For as the sufferings of Christ abound in us,

so our consolation also aboundeth by Christ. And whether we be
afflicted, it is for your consolation and salvation, which is effectual
in the enduring of the same sufferings which we also suffer: . . .
And our hope of you is stedfast, knowing, that as ye are partakers
of the sufferings, so shall ye be also of the consolation. For we

 

 

would not
came to 1
above stI
we had t1
trust in c
deliverec
we trust

This int:
srmarises t1
examined in 0:
:this one, m

First, \&
ieir equivale:
Eight verses,
parallel betwe
5Elievers, "m
maturity Wher
signers own e
sch tribtflatic
least of SUCh 1
filter (V 9).

That the
qiscernible by
ment VerSes v
bdicates this,
Palll declares:

r110 YOu. H In

"v
S

196

would not, brethren, have you ignorant of our trouble which
came to us in Asia, that we were pressed out of measure,
above strength, insomuch that we deSpaired even of life: but
we had the sentence of death in ourselves, that we Should not
trust in ourselves, but in God which raiseth the dead: who
delivered us from so great a death, and doth deliver; in whom
we trust that he will yet deliver us. . . 1:3-10

This introductory passage is the keynote of the epistle, and
summarises (the argument of the whole. Therefore, it Should be closely
examined in order that subsequent passages, based upon the thoughts
in this one, may be readily understood.

First, we notice that the words ”suffering, " "tribulation, " or
their equivalents are used by the Apostle more than ten times in these
eight verses. Secondly, Paul implies in v 5 that there is a mystical
parallel between the sufferings of Christ and the troubled career of
believers. Thirdly, it is affirmed that such tribulation brings a spiritual
maturity whereby one is able to assist others in trouble (v 4), because
of one's own experience of the consolations from God. Fourthly, all
such tribulations lead to ultimate, benefit (vs 6, 7). Fifthly, not the
least of such benefits is the development of implicit trust in divine
power (v 9).

That these assumptions underlie the argument of the epistle is
discernible by noticing their recurrence throughout. A glance at subse-
quent verses which use the words ”tribulation" or 'l'affliction” also
indicates this. For example, in the second chapter and the fourth verse
Paul declares: "For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote
unto you. " In the fourth chapter we have as follows: "But we have this
treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of
God, and not of us. We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed;
we are perplexed, but not in despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; .

cast down, but not destroyed; always bearing about in the body the dying

197

of the Lord Jesus . For we which live are alway delivered unto
death for Jesus' sake, that the life also of Jesus might be made
manifest in our mortal flesh. ” vs 7-11. Later in the same chapter,
this thought recurs. "For our light affliction, which is but for a moment,
worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory; while
we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not
seen. . . . " vs 17, 18. In the Sixth chapter, the thread of this thought
is again apparent in the fourth verse. "But in all things approving our-
selves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in
necessities, in distresses. . . . ” Notice that Paul directly says here
that these very difficulties are requisite for making manifest who are
the genuine ministers of God. In a similar position in the next chapter
we read: "I am exceeding joyful in all our tribulation. " v 4. Again, in
the eighth chapter Paul states: "For I mean not that other men be
eased, and ye burdened. " v 13. The word here translated ”burdened”
is elsewhere in this letter translated as ”afflicted" or "troubled, " and
should be so in this case.

This refrain concerning tribulation as the lot of the human instru-
ments of God reaches a crescendo in the eleventh and twelfth chapters.
Referring to his critics at Corinth Paul asks: "Are they ministers of
Christ? . . . I am more. . . . " Then he proceeds to chronicle a portion
of his missionary experience.

. . . in labours more abundant, in stripes above measure, in
prisons more frequent, in deaths oft. Of the Jews five times
received I forty stripes save one. Thrice was I beaten with rods,
once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night and a day
I have been in the deep; in journeyings often, in perils of waters,
in perils of robbers, in perils by mine own countrymen, in perils
by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness,
in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; in weariness
~and painfulness, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in
fastings often, in cold and nakedness. Beside those things that

198

are without, that which cometh upon me daily, the care of all
the churches. vs 23-28

We shall not at this juncture pause to comment upon the ethical appeal

of this recital. It is sufficient for now that we observe its conformity

to the premise expressed at the commencement of the discourse, namely
that all the true servants of God are disciplined by trials and sufferings.
Similarly, in the next chapter we read:

And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance
of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the
messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I Should be exalted above
measure. For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might
depart from me. And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for
thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly
therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of
Christ may rest upon me. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmi-
ties, in‘ reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses
for Christ's sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong. 12:7-10

These two passages constitute the peak of the Apostle's argument.
Over and over he has repeated the thought that suffering is a seal of
genuine apostleship, if associated with evidences of the power of God.
In the beginning and end of his address he has demonstrated that such
has) been his own lot. In the body of the message, again and again he
has interwoven the same evidence derived from personal experience.
As we recall that the Corinthian believers centered their faith around
a Divine Person whose life of sorrows had been climaxed by the suffer-
ings of Calvary, it is evident that Paul's argument was both powerful
and appropriate.

The tracing of a second key-word in the epistle revealsa second
line of argument. This word is phaneroS, which means "to manifest, "
"to make clear. " This word or its cognates occurs almost as many
times as there are chapters in the letter. Apparently the opposition

party at Corinth had accused Paul of falsifying the Scriptures, and

 

 

199

teaching a mysterious, hidden doctrine. Furthermore, they urged that
he gained converts through deceitful methods (4:3; 2:17; 4:2). In 2 Cor
12:16 the Authorized version represents Paul as saying: ”. . . never-
theless, being crafty, I caught you with guile. " Most modern versions
correct this rendering, and in harmony with what is admissible from
the original Greek, translate it as Paul's reference to the charge of his
opponents at Corinth. The RSV has "I was crafty, y_01_.1_ say, and got the
better of you by guile. " The many passages wherein Paul uses the
word phaneroo refer to these slanders and are intended as rebuttal.

Let us consider some of these passages.

Therefore seeing we have this ministry, as we have received
mercy, we faint not; but have renounced the hidden things of dis-
honesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God
deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves
to every man's conscience in the sight of God. But if our gOSpel
be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: in whom the god of this
world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the
light of the glorious gOSpel of Christ, who is the image of God,
should shine unto them. For we preach not ourselves, but Christ
Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake.

For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath
shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory
of God in the face of Jesus Christ. But we have this treasure

in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of
God, and not of us. We are troubled on every side, yet not dis-
tressed. . . . 4: 1-8

We have noticed from 2 Cor 12:16, and other passages, that Paul
had been accused of craftiness. This present passage is Paul's pre-
liminary attempt at vindicating his behaviour. What is first noteworthy
is the skillful employment of varying terms which signify the opposite of
all that is associated with craftiness. For example, while craftiness is
usually linked with surreptitious, hidden activities, which are performed
in the dark for- fear of witnesses, Paul' S behaviour is here associated with

frank manifestations of truth witnessed by both men and God. ”. . . by

200

manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's
conscience in the sight of God. " v 2 PhaneroB, the root word for
"manifestation” means “to make clear, " "to bring into the light, " and
it can hardly be accidental that Paul pursues this thought by the
repeated references to ”light, " ”glory, " "Shining" in this passage.
The word "light" occurs three times, "glory" or a cognate occurs
twice, and "shining" is referred to on three occasions. The Apostle
here argues from Sign and from analogy. One Sign of his upright
behaviour had been the fact that the only means he had employed to win
his way among the Corinthians had been "the manifestation of truth. "
He had not appealed to men's prejudices or tastes, but instead he had
presented that which was highest and which their own consciences had
acknowledged. By declaring in verse three that only ”the lost" had
found his gospel "hidden" or hard to understand, Paul reminds the
Corinthians that whad understood the message. Surely, he infers,
this demonstrates that my words were not clouded with the shadows of
error or deceit. In verse five he mentions another sign of the cor-
rectness of his behaviour among them. ”For we preach not ourselves,
but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus's
sake. " None could say he had been egotistic in his preaching. He had
not preached himself. Christ had been his theme. Furthermore his
sole presentation of himself had been as one who was prepared to be
"a servant for Jesus' sake. " The word used for ”servant” is doulos,
which literally means "slave. "

Next Paul employs an analogy from the record of the creation found
in the first chapter of Scripture. He refers to the time when God caused
the light to shine out of darkness, and he uses this as a parallel to the
work that God has evidently done through him, by his manifestation of
the gospel of light to those in the heathen darkness of Corinth. Thus he

201

reminds the church that their own experience of conversion is the
strongest evidence that he, Paul, had been an agent of God. The
charge made by the Jewish faction that the ApO‘Stle had practised deceit
must be false, or the experience Of the majority Of the church members
had been a delusion. Verse four had made reference to a fact that the
Corinthians already acknowledged, namely that it was Satan, "the god
Of this world" who brought darkness upon men. This being the case,
the believers must either acknowledge Paul to be what he claimed to be,
or they must repudiate their own recent experience of conversion.

In the seventh verse Paul had referred to himself as an ”earthen
vessel. " Probably this is a side glance at the taunts from his opponents
regarding his physique and his infirmities. The mockery is turned to
good account as Paul argues that God is glorified the more by His
employment of weak instruments. The thought is naturally extended by
the following reference to his current persecutions and difficulties.

We Should observe that Paul thus intertwines his primary argument
(regarding suffering as a badge of discipleship), with his present claim
of transparently sincere and holy conduct.

In this one Short passage of eight verses Paul has denied the
charge of his having employed guile. Summarising the foregoing, we
find that his arguments are as follows:

1. He had ever lived Openly as both the Corinthians and God

had witnessed.

2. His method of working had been the manifestation Of such

truths as the consciences Of his hearers had acknowledged.

3 . His preaching had been marked by humility. Only Christ had

been exalted. The Apostle had dedicated himself to service,

as though a slave, in order to help the Corinthians.

202

4. As certainly as God made the light in the beginning, so it
must have been He who used Paul as an instrument of light
to rescue the Corinthians from the darkness of their former
errors.

5. Paul's bodily infirmities were no cause for his rejection,
inasmuch as it glorified God to use weak vessels.

6. Similarly the troubles and conflicts endured by the Apostle
witnessed to the fact that he had been chosen to share "the
sufferings of Christ. " ‘

His detractors had painted the picture of a weak, crafty deceiver
suffering for his sins. Paul reverses their use of "light and shade"
and causes his true likeness to appear.

In the next chapter the same figure of ”manifestation" is used in
a new argument from the Apostle.

Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may

‘ be accepted of him. For we must all appear before the judgment
seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in
his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or
bad. Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men;
but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made
manifest in your consciences. 5:9-11

Here Paul asserts that in all his labours, the thought of the Judg-
ment Day, as: well as the love of Christ (v 14) motivated his behaviour.
The English translation obscures the fact that Paul uses the same word
here for "appear" as is elsewhere translated "manifest. "

It may be noted that it [phaneroa] is Specially characteristic
of this Epistle, in which it occurs nine times. The English
version, which can Only be ascribed to the unintelligent desire
of the translators to vary for the sake of variation, besides
being weak in itself, hinders the reader from seeing the
reference to 1 Cor 4:5, or even the connection with the "made
manifest" in the next verse. 1

 

lPlumptre, Ellicott, Vol. VII, p. 379.

 

 

203

Paul is saying in effect--Inasmuch as all that I do must one day be
manifested at the Judgment bar of God, I daily live in such a way that
both God and man may behold in me irreproachable conduct. His argu-
ment also implies that it is hardly likely that he who had preached con-
cerning the Judgment to the Corinthians, would live as though in
ignorance of that ultimate denouement. PhaneroO recurs in later chapters
of the letter (7:12; 11:6), emphasizing and repeating the thoughts earlier
expressed.

Having now considered the two fundamental concepts of this letter,
relative to Paul's sufferings and his transparent conduct, let us now
turn to the subsidiary arguments which are interwoven with the fore-
going in the Apostle's Apology.

Following his enunciation,in chapter one, Of the significance of
suffering for the Christian and the record in chapter two of his receipt
of good news from Titus, Paul turns to consider the accusation that
he had no letters of reference to commend him. His argument in this
third chapter is not an easy one for a modern western mind to compre-
hend, and therefore the whole text is presented in order that its force
upon the minds of the early Christians might be explained.

Are we beginning to commend ourselves again? Or do
we need, as some do, letters of recommendation to you, or from
you? You yourselves are our letter of recommendation, written
on your hearts, to be known and read by all men; and you Show
that you are a letter from Christ delivered by us, written not
with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone
but on tablets of human hearts.

Such is the confidence that we have through Christ toward
God. Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to claim anything
as coming from us; our sufficiency is from God, who has quali-
fied us to be ministers of a new covenant, not in a written code
but in the Spirit; for the written code kills, but the Spirit gives
life.

Now if the dispensation of death, carved in letters on stone,
came with such Splendor that the Israelites could not look at

 

204

Moses' face because of its brightness, fading as this was, why
Should not the dispensation of the Spirit be attended with greater
Splendor? For if there was splendor in the diSpensation of con-
demnation, the dispensation of righteousness must far exceed

it in Splendor. Indeed, in this case, what once had splendor has
come to have no Splendor at all, because of the Splendor that
surpasses it. For if what faded away came with Splendor, what
is permanent must have much more splendor.

Since we have such a hOpe, we are very bold, not like
Moses, who put a veil over his face so that the Israelites might
not see the end of the fading splendor. But their minds were
hardened; for to this day, when they read the old covenant, that
same veil remains unlifted, because only through Christ is it
taken away. Yes, to this day whenever Moses is read a veil lies
over their minds; but when a man turns to the Lord the veil is
removed. Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the
Lord is, there is freedom. And we all, with unveiled face,
beholding the glory of the Lord, are being changed into his like-
ness from one degree of glory to another; for this comes from
the Lord who is the Spirit. 3: 1-18 RSV

Basically, this is an argument from analogy. It includes; the use
of metaphor, synecdoche, Simile, and symbolism.

The first verse declares his purpose in this section of his dis-
course. ". . . need we, as some others, epistles of commendation to
you, or letters of commendation from you?" Immediately prior to
these words he had uttered a burst of praise to God because of the
divine blessing on his ministry (2:4-16). This could be ridiculed by
his critics who might be led to assert that “self-praise is no recommend-
ation. " Therefore Paul sets about to establish that his position as an
Apostle does not rest upon his own claims merely, or upon letters of
reference from other sources. It was a common practice in the early
church to use letters of recommendation for Christians leaving one
community for another. The letter to Philemon in the New Testament
is of this nature. Possibly Paul's critics at Corinth were themselves
in possession of such from some church leaders at Jerusalem. This

would explain Paul's allusion in verse one to "the some" who were

205

vaunting such epistolatory recommendations. In this same verse the
Apostle is ironically, but also sadly, enquiring whether he, the founder
of the Corinthian church, stood in the same position of need as regards
references as did utter strangers.

In answer to his own question he asserts in bold metaphor "Ye
are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men:
forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ
ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living
God: not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart. " vs 2, 3.
The metaphor regarding the living epistle as existing both in the hearts
of Paul and his fellow labourers, and in the person of his converts,
may at first seem clumsy in application. Only Paul's habit of compress-
ing several ideas within very brief compass guides us in understanding
his meaning here. Firstly his meaning is that the Corinthians them—
selves are written as a letter on the Apostle's heart. The affectionate
ties between the church members and their leader gave visible evidence
to all men of his true relationship to the church. His pre-occupation
with their welfare, his intercession on their behalf, his many tears
shed regarding them--all these witnessed to his real character and stand-
ing. Secondly, Paul is saying that the Corinthians themselves, in their
changed conduct since conversion, constituted a living recommendation
of him who had been the human instrument of their transformation.

These same verses argue from the analogy of the divine writing
of the Ten Commandments on the two tables of stone. Paul infers that
the Author of that ancient code, who once wrote with His finger upon
stone, has now chosen the Apostle as His instrument to‘place that code
upon the human hearts of the Corinthians. Indirectly, Paul is arguing
also from the authority of Old Testament prophecies which had foretold

just such a work. The Corinthians in all likelihood had often read the

206

following predictions from their sacred writings.

. . . this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house
of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in
their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be
their God, and they shall be my people. Jer 31:33

. . . For I will take you from among the heathen . . . from all
your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.

A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put
within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your
flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. Eze 36:24-26

Lest these present claims Should be construed as boasting, Paul
hastens now to add:

Not that we are sufficient Of ourselves to think any thing as of
ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God; who also hath made us
able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the
spirit: for the letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life. vs 5, 6

By these words Paul not only endeavors to safeguard himself against
the charge of further boasting, but he also makes a transition in argument
from the evidence for his personal claims to the evidence derived by a
consideration of the superiority of the new diSpensation of which he is
a minister. He declares that God has appointed him a minister of the
new testament, or as it Should be translated, "of a new covenant" (RSV).
This covenant is superior to the old covenant formerly known by the
Jews, inasmuch as the new dispensation is marked by the gift Of the Holy
Spirit to believers. Now Paul proceeds to contrast the Mosaic economy
with the Christian.

The commentator Wordsworth has summarised in excellent fashion
the arguments of the foregoing verses. He says:

The connexion of the sentences therefore is: I do not need letters
of commendation. Ye are my Apostolic credentials. Your con-
version to Christianity wrought by my instrumentality, and the
gifts of the Holy Spirit poured upon you, through my ministry,
are my testimonials, "known and read” by the eyes of all. Ye
are Christ' S Epistle ministered by me, --an Epistle written by
the hand of the Holy Ghost, who has inscribed the Gospel by my

207

means, not on tables of stone, but on your hearts. Not that I
therefore claim any honour to myself. I am a mere diakonos,
[diakonos a servant]. Christ is the Master; He is the only Source;

I am a mere channel. He is the divine Agent; I am a mere
instrument. But He has been pleased to employ and enable me to
fulfil His promises and prophecies, and to write by me a New
Covenant, not of Letter, but of Spirit; that is, not of a Law written
on stone, but of the Spirit, writing on the heart; and teaching and
enabling you to perform it, by the—gracious outpourings of the
Holy Ghost, shed upon you through my Apostolic ministry. 1

 

 

 

Now Paul proceeds to contrast the Mosaic economy with the Christian
age which he personally represents.

But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones,
was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly
behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance: which
glory was to be done away: how shall not the ministration of the
spirit be rather glorious? vs 7, 8

He refers to the Mosaic economy which was ushered in by the glorious
descent of Jehovah upon Mount Sinai as ”the ministration Of death. "
When Israel had been a theocracy, every transgression of the Ten
Commandments was considered as an act of rebellion, and it was im-
mediately punished by the death penalty. Although judgment was so
instantaneous and severe as to merit calling that dispensation a ”minis-
tration of death" yet it was still ”glorious, ” affirmed Paul. He here
alludes to the record in Ex 34:29-35 where Moses describes the Shining
of his face when he descended Mount Sinai and faced the people, with
the tables of the law in his hand. According to that record, Moses had
ultimately veiled himself for the benefit of the awe-struck Israelites.
This glory, says Paul, was a fading one, but the glory of the New Testa-
ment age was never to pass away.

In the remaining verses of this passage Paul allegorises from the

incident of the veiling of the face of Moses. He declares that the

 

lWordsworth, Commentary, Vol. 2, p. 153.

 

 

208

temporary nature of the glory on the face of Moses was indicative of

the temporary nature of the Mosaic economy. God intended that it
should give way to the age of Christianity, the age of the New Covenant,
which would ever be attended by the unfading glory of the ministering
Holy Spirit. In the veil used by Moses, Paul sees a symbol of the
present unbelief of the Jews which prevents their perceiving the glory
of the gOSpel that he represents. In contrast he declares ”But we all,
with open [1. e. unveiled] face beholding as in a glass the glory of the
Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as

by the Spirit Of the Lord. " v 18. Thus by employing arguments based
on the authority of the Old Testament Scriptures, and by using allegory
and symbolism, Paul contends for the great superiority Of the ministry
he represents, compared to the ministry of the Jewish economy. While
such arguments employed in our day would probably not carry great
weight, Paul was addressing peOple' who were accustomed to such
reasoning by the tradition of centuries. Every Bible parable is a kind
of allegory, and the Jews had long been skilled in the allegorical method
of interpretation.

The Jews, in the days of Jesus, employed . . . eSpecially the
typico-allegorical interpretation. The Jews Of Palestine
endeavored by means of this mode of interpretation especially
to elicit the secrets of futurity, which were said to be fully
contained in the Old Testament. 1

Similarly, the Greeks saw in many of their classics allegories concern-
ing man's experience in this life. Inasmuch as even the Gentile members
of the Corinthian church had become familiarised with the Jewish scrip-
tures, Paul's mode of argument would seem entirely appr0priate to

them .

 

1John McClintock and James Strong, Cyclopaedia Of Biblical,
Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature. 7 10 vols. and 2 supple-
mentar‘fvolumes. lst Edition (New York: Harper and Brothers,
Publishers, 1877), Vol. 4, p. 626.

 

 

 

 

209

vThe fourth chapter with its emphasis on Paul's manifestation
of truth by holy living and teaching has been already discussed. In
the next chapter he deals particularly with the accusations concerning
his sanity and his motives. He says with reference to these charges:

For whether we be beside ourselves, it is to God: or whether we
be sober (”in our right mind" RSV), it is for your cause. For the
love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one
died for all, then were all dead: and that he died for all, that
they which live Should not henceforth live unto themselves, but
unto him which died for them, and rose again. Wherefore hence-
forth know we no man after the flesh, . . . vs 13-16

If at times my enthusiasm has seemed like madness, says Paul, it was
zeal for the service of God which SO enthused me.

'Take whichever side of my life you like, assume that the
whole of it is either the one or the other, where does selfishness
come in? There is no room for it, either in the madness which
is directed to God's glory, or in the sanity which is devoted to
your edification.‘l

Regarding his motives, it is Christ's love for him, and his love for
Christ that has prompted all his words and deeds. If Christ has died
for all, then it must mean that all were judicially condemned to death.
And, therefore, those who accept His vicarious death on their behalf
cannot now live selfishly as before. Rather, their whole life must be
spent in Christ's service. Henceforward, our dealings with men will
no longer be marked by carnalz considerations, such as wealth or other
personal advantages. Thus I have preached, says the Apostle in effect,
and thus I have lived. Where the A. V. has "henceforth know we no man
after the flesh, " the Greek has the "we” before the verb in the emphatic

position, thus indicating that while some others (his detractors) were

 

lPlummer, Cambridge Bible, p. 53.

 

zThe word is here employed in the Pauline sense of non- Spiritual.

210

guided by fleshly and carnal considerations, such is not the case with
the Apostle.

Now Paul gives a test whereby both he and his accusers may be
measured. "Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature:
old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. " v 17
To demonstrate that all true workers for Christ are transformed in
nature and purposes is the Objective of the following chapter. He pro-
poses what Should be the behaviour Of all who believed in Christ's
vicarious death. The passage is interwoven with side-glances at the
accusations made against himself by the false teachers at Corinth, and
in these verses he presents an account Of his own ministry which might
well have shamed his adversaries. The account provides material for
his defense by those who esteemed him in the church; and when applied
as a measuring rod to the members Of the Opposing party, the latter
could not but suffer in reputation. The passage is as follows:

We then, as workers together with him, beseech you also that
ye receive not the grace of God in vain. . . . Giving no offense
in any thing, that the ministry be not blamed: but in all things
approving ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience,
in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses, in stripes, in ‘
imprisonments, in turnults, in labours, in watchings, in fastings,
by pureness, by knowledge, by long suffering, by kindness, by
the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned, by the word of truth, by the
power of God, by the armour of righteousness on the right hand
and on the left, by honour and dishonour, by evil report and good
report: as deceivers, and yet true; as unknown, and yet well
known; as dying, and, behold we live; as chastened, and not
killed; as sorrowful, yet alway rejoicing; as poor, yet making
many rich; as having nothing and yet possessing all things.

6: 1- 10

This passage, appearing as it does towards the end of the first
major section of this discourse, reveals the unity of theme throughout
the first seven chapters. In these verses the Apostle'S'tWO major

concepts regarding sufferings for Christ's sake, and an Open life of

211

manifest holiness, are linked together in powerful appeal. 1 Patently
these verses are a skillful presentation of the argument that no man
who is a deceiver could possibly live the arduous and upright life here
pictured. The allusions to "dishonour, ” "evil report, ” “deceivers, "
etc. , are obviously reminiscent of the calumnies that had been uttered
against him at Corinth. In this series of paradoxes are significant
concepts which not only defended Paul's own course, but provided
inspiration for saints, sages, and martyrs for centuries to come. It is
unfortunately too easy a matter to read them cursorily without graSping
the magnitude of their meaning. How much is involved, for example,
in the culminating paradox--“as having nothing, and yet possessing all
things"? Thus ". . . he utters the truth that in the absolute surrender
of the thought of calling anything its own, the soul becomes the heir of
the universe. "7‘ While these words carry logical weight, it is apparent
that their appeal is specifically to the feelings of his audience, and as
such will appear again in our discussion of pathetic proof.

In the following chapter Paul concludes this section of this dis-
course by praising the majority group at Corinth for their acceptance
of the counsel in his preceding letter. He ends on this note: "I rejoice
therefore that I have confidence in you in all things. "

While the first seven chapters have been occupied with Paul' s
delineation of true ministry, and the defense of his own participation
therein, the middle section of this epistle is concerned with the very
practical issue of a collection on behalf of the poor. How does he
endeavor to persuade the Corinthians to give liberally to this collection?

What are his main arguments in these three chapters?

 

lThe pathetic strength of this passage is discussed under Pathos.
By "powerf " appeal we mean one that was powerful to those who
thought as the Corinthians did.

zPlumptre, Ellicott, Vol. VII, p. 385.

212

In the discussion regarding pathetic proof it will be pointed out
that we have excellent examples of motivation in this part of Paul's
message. However a logical emphasis is also present. First he argues
that if the poverty- stricken believers in Macedonia could freely donate
from their pitiful store, then the Corinthians, residents of a richer
district, could follow suit.

We want you to know, brethren, about the grace Of God which
has been shown in the churches of Macedonia, for in a severe
test of affliction, their abundance of joy and their extreme
poverty have overflowed in a wealth of liberality on their part.
For they gave according to their means, as I can testify, and
beyond their means, of their own free will, begging us earnestly
for the favor Of taking part in the relief of the saints--and this,
not as we expected, but first they gave themselves to the Lord
and to us by the will of God. Accordingly we have urged Titus
that as he had already made a beginning, he Should also complete
among you this gracious work. Now as you excel in everything--
in faith, in utterance, in knowledge, in all earnestness, and in
your love for us--see that you excel in this gracious work also.
8: 1-7 RSV

By the churches of Macedonia, Paul refers particularly to those of
Philippi, Thessalonica, and Berea. He stresses two things with
reference to these churches. (1) Their dire poverty; and (2) their great
liberality. Could any stronger points be made than these in urging that
the richer Corinthians should be able to follow the example of the
Macedonian believers ? It is significant also that Paul attributes the
generosity primarily to "the grace of God" bestowed upon these other
churches. Thus if God could so move upon others in this way, He could
do so again at Corinth if the believers were willing.

Paul's next argument is stronger still. He refers now to the
example of Christ Himself. "For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus
Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor,

that ye through his poverty might be rich. " v 9 If God Himself had

213

set the example of giving, if His Son who was ”Lord of all" had never-
theless condescended in the incarnation to accept the poverty of a
Galilean peasant, then surely it was only reasonable that His followers
would follow Him in sacrificial giving. SO Paul argues.

Some might reSpond by asserting that they could not give as others
would because of their poverty. Paul meets this before it is voiced by
expressing the principle of proportionate giving, and suggests that the
time could come whent_h£X would receive Similar assistance if needed.

For if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to
that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not. For I
mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened: but by an
equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply
for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for
your want: that there may be equality: as it is written, He that
had gathered much had nothing over; and he that had gathered
little had no lack. vs 12-15

The last sentence is intended by Paul as Scriptural support for his
counsel. He is'quoting from Ex 16:18, the record of the gathering of
the manna, and its proportionate distribution after its collection. The
reference is particularly apt.

Lest some Should restrain their giving in case proper care was
not taken of the funds, Paul outlines the plan for safeguarding the offer-
ings. Members chosen by different churches are to travel together
I with the funds. "Avoiding this, " says Paul, “that no man should blame
us in this abundance which is administered by us: providing for honest
things, not only in the Sight of the Lord, but also in the sight of man. "
vs 20, 21. He is not so fanatical as to declare that a clear conscience
on the part of the one in charge of the finance was all that was necessary.
He is concerned with avoiding ‘even the appearance of evil.

In the next chapter the Apostle argues from the analogy of the

harvest.

214

But this I say, He which soweth Sparingly Shall reap also Spar-
ingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.
Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him
give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful
giver. And God is able to make all grace abound toward you; that
ye, always having all sufficiency in all things, may abound to
every good work . . . .Now he that ministereth seed to the sower
both minister bread for your food, and multiply your seed sown,
and increase the fruits of your righteousness; being enriched in
everything to all bountifulness, which causeth through us thanks-
giving to God. 9:6-11

In an age where a far greater proportion of people were engaged in
agriculture than in our own day, these allusions to sowing and reaping
were entirely appr0priate. The metaphor is supported by a Scriptural
quotation-—"F or God loveth a cheerful giver," found in the Septuagint
translation of Prov 22:8. This love of God for the liberal giver will
result in such blessing that the generous believer will ”always have all
sufficiency in all things. " Probably Paul reached this conclusion on the
basis of Old Testament promises which he accepted as divinely inspired.
Typical of these is Proverbs 11:24, 25. ”There is that scattereth, and
yet increaseth. . . . The liberal soul shall be made fat: and he that
watereth Shall be watered also himself. "

The next argument in this chapter is that several good purposes
will be served by the bountiful offering that is suggested. Not only would
the trials of the impoverished believers be alleviated, but much thanks-
giving would redound to God. Furthermore it would be demonstrated
that the Christian profession of the Corinthian church members was a
genuine one.

For the administration of this service not only supplieth the
want of the saints, but is abundant also by many thanksgivings
unto God; whiles by the experiment of this ministration they
glorify God for your professed subjection unto the gOSpel of
Christ, and for your liberal distribution unto them, and unto all
men. . . . 9:12, 13

 

215

Finally, Paul does in the conclusion of his appeal what he had
done at the commencement. He argues from example, the example of
God's generosity in Christ. The statement he makes is the more
powerful because it is simple and unadorned. Without st0pping to
moralise, he merely adds the criSp thanksgiving--"Thanks be unto
God for E1 unspeakable gift. " 9: 15

Thus, in this section regarding the financial collection to be made,
Paul has argued from example, from analogy, from the authority of
Scripture, and from causal reasoning.

The last three chapters Of'this address constitute a separate
section. They are marked by an entirely different tone from the preced-
ing.

At this stage there was manifestly another pause, Of greater
or less length, in the act of dictating. Fresh thoughts (of a
different kind are working in his mind, and rousing feelings
of a very different kind from those which had been just ex-
pressed. At last he breaks silence and begins anew. 1

Kling points out that the particle ”de, " translated "Now" in the KJV. ,
is the mark of the introduction of a new section. (He quotes from Dean
Stanley's introductory comment on this passage as follows:

The conciliatory and affectionate strain of entreaty which per-
vaded the first part, is exchanged for that of stern command,

and almost menace: there is still the same expression of de-
votion to the Corinthian Church. 2

The first verses of this section contain several allusions to the

criticisms of the Apostle's detractors.

Now I Paul myself beseech you by the meekness and gentleness
of Christ, who in presence am base among you, but being absent
am bold toward you: but I beseech you, that I may not be bold
when I am present with that confidence, wherewith I think to be
bold against some, which think of us as if we walked according
to the flesh. 10: 1, 2

 

llenptre, Ellicott, Vol. VII, p. 397.
z1pm., p. 163.

216

Apparently the critics had ridiculed Paul' s physical appearance as
"base, " and contended that he could evidence boldness only by means

of letters from a distance. The reference to "walking according to the
flesh” is an allusion to the accusation that carnal motives such as greed
motivated him. In reSponse, Paul asserts:

For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:

for the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through

God to the pulling down of strong holds; casting down imaginations,

and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of

God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience

of Christ. . . . Do ye look on things after the outward appearance?

If any man trust to himself that he is Christ' S, let him of himself

think this again, that, as he is Christ's, even so are we Christ's.
10:3-7

The argument is that if the Apostle's evangelistic warfare were con-
ducted on worldly principles, his weapons also would be worldly and
ultimately unsuccessful. To Paul, the contrary is the case however,

for he declares that even ”strongholds” of heathenism have been made

to capitulate, and the very thoughts of men's hearts have been redirected
through the power of his gospel. The question "Do ye look on things
after the outward appearance?" is a warning against a mode of reason-
ing which the Corinthian believers themselves would acknowledge to be
unchristian.

Next Paul quotes the very words of the false teachers. "For his
letters, say they, are weighty and powerful; but his bodily presence is
weak and his speech contemptible. " 10: 10 It is the last phrase which
is of particular interest to the Speech critic. What was meant by the
criticism that Paul's Speech was contemptible? It could hardly have
reference to the content of his Speeches if his letters admittedly were
"weighty and powerful. " One has but to read the address on Mars Hill,
or that given before Agrippa, to be convinced of the quality of Pauline

ideas as expressed in his typical oratory. It is more likely that this

217

particular criticism has reference to the style and delivery of the
Apostle as being bereft of the qualities most esteemed in this age of
the second sophistic. 1 For the present let us notice that the Apostle
does not meet the argument by a defense of his speaking ability.
Instead he works by pointing out the Spur of conceit which evidently
was actuating his opponents and thus discredits these Judaizers.
Apparently he believed as some moderns, that even in Speech, attack
is Often the best defense.

For we dare not make ourselves of the number, or compare our-
selves—‘with some that commend themselves; but they measuring them-
selves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves,
are not wise. . . . For not he that commendeth himself is approved,
but whom the Lord commendeth. 10:12, 18

In the next chapter three arguments can be traced. First, Paul
points out that his financial independence when among the Corinthians
was good evidence of the purity of his intentions. Secondly, he warns
these Christians that if Satan himself can masquerade as an "angel of
light, " "it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the
ministers Of righteousness. " In other words he is saying, Do not be
deceived by lofty claims and pretensions to righteousness, inasmuch as
evil never appears in its true form, but instead it counterfeits truth.
Thirdly, whatever qualifications the false teachers claimed to possess
actually existed in a far greater measure in the one they repudiated.
The following is an abridgement of the line of thought to be found in the
text.

Have I committed an Offence in abasing myself that ye might be
exalted, because I have preached to you the gosPel of God freely?
I robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service.
And when I was present with you, and wanted, I was chargeable
to no man: for that which was lacking to me the brethren which

 

1This point is elaborated elsewhere in this dissertation.

218

came from Macedonia supplied: and in all things I have kept
myself from being burdensome unto you, and so will I keep
myself. . . . But what I do, that I will do, that I may cut off
occasion from them which desire occasion; that wherein they
glory, they may be found even as we. For such are false
apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the
apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is trans-
formed into an angel of light. . . . Seeing that many glory after
the flesh, I will glory also. . . . whereinsoever any is bold,

(I Speak foolishly,) I am bold also. Are they Hebrews? SO am I.
Are they Israelites? so am I. Are they the seed of Abraham?
so am I. Are they ministers of Christ? . . . I am more; in
labours more abundant. . . . 11:7-23

Chapter twelve is intended further to substantiate the claims of
the missionary Apostle. Paul Speaks Of supernatural revelations
vouchsafed to him, and also of the “thorn in the flesh, " some physical
infirmity, permitted of God in order to keep him from being "exalted
above measure. " The argument is that his privileges have been so
great that God has of necessity taken special care to keep the exalted
messenger from spiritual pride. Paul links this thought with the theme
he had introduced at the beginning of his discourse, that the faithful
endurance of suffering on the part of God's messengers both vindicates
them and exalts the power of God which operates through weak and
harried instruments.

And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my
strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore

will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ

may rest upon me. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities,

in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses

for Christ's sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong. 12:9, 10

Paul, having made these disclosures of his divinely-granted privileges,
now drOps all reserve and asserts his claim vigorously.

I ought to have been commended of you: for in nothing am I behind
the very chiefest apostles, though I be nothing. Truly the signs

of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs,
and wonders, and mighty deeds. vs 11, 12

219

He turns the tables and focusses the Spotlight upon the Corinthians,

saying:
Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own
selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is

in you, except ye be reprobates. 13:5
Thus in conclusion, Paul urges the Corinthians to look to their own
salvation. He says with some irony that this Should be their chief con-
cern even if he should be considered by some as reprobate.

But we pray God that you may not do wrong--not that we may
appear to have met the test, but that you may do what is right,
though we may seem to have failed. 13:7 RSV

Then follows the farewell--concise, pointed, hortatory, and affection-

ate.

Finally, brethren, farewell. Mend your ways, heed my appeal,
agree with one another, live in peace, and the God of love and
peace will be with you. Greet one another with a holy kiss.

All the saints greet you. The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ
and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with
you all. 13: 11-14 RSV

This, epistle, the most agitated and stormy of all Paul's addresses,
closes with the most formal and solemn Of his benedictions. It is possible
that the proverbial pin could have been heard if drOpped in the Corinthian
assembly at this point. The soaring flight of the Apostle's self-defense
had been abruptly interrupted as if in mid-course by a warning to the
listeners that they needed to be more concerned with their own conduct
than with his, and then had come the final pungent and solemn words of
farewell. The effect would be analogous to that upon a passenger in a
fast-moving automobile who suddenly heard the brakes screech, and
found the vehicle within a foot of the edge of a precipice.

It is evident from the foregoing that Paul's lines of argument are
mainly deductive in character. Throughout he postulates truths derived

from divine revelation which the Corinthians already claim to accept.

220

From these premises, based on divine authority, Paul argues to the
conclusions he seeks. He reasons from cause, Sign, and from analogy.
Throughout most of his apology there is evident restraint which actually
intensifies his assertions by inferring that much more could be said
under each head. We miss the inductive reasoning so characteristic of
modern scientific method. However, addressing as he did, an audience
committed to a belief in absolutes, Paul's reliance upon deduction is
not inappropriate. At times, some arguments such as the one based on
analogy and allegory in the third chapter may seem strained to modern
minds. When we recall the modes of hermeneutics characteristic of
the first century, however, we are enabled to view such arguments in

clearer light.

Analysis of Pathos

 

. . . pathetic proof includes all those materials and devices
calculated to put the audience in a frame of mind suitable for
the reception of the Speaker's ideas. 1

Such a definition as this would seem to include both appeals to the
emotions and those to the motives. The following analysis of pathetic
proof in this discourse is based upon such an understanding. In the
words of Irving J. Lee:

It is more important that the critic define the argument as one
which involves the notion of fame, wealth, health, fear, anger,
or pity, and define it accurately, than that he be concerned
whether fame, wealth, health, are t0poi of happiness or topoi
of the emotions.

With this in mind we would ask the question: Did Paul "evince

an intelligent understanding of the nature of the problem, and did he apply

 

lThonssen and Baird, p. 358.

zlrving J. Lee, "Some Conceptions of Emotional Appeal in
Rhetorical Theory, " Speech Monographs, VI (1939), p. 85.

221

that insight to the practical task of disposing his hearers in his
behalf? "1

The problem in this instance was very evidently one of relation-
ship between the Corinthian church and Paul. AS has been pointed out,
a small group had turned against the Apostle, being influenced by some
critical teachers who were strongly Jewish in leaning. Strong accusations
had been levelled against the person, the character, and the teachings
of the founder of the local church. Paul's objective, therefore, is to
vindicate his apostleship, quicken the love of those still loyal to him,
and Shame the minority group into repentance. A. side-issue is the
matter of the collection for the impoverished believers in Jerusalem.
Obviously the motives and emotions to which Paul must appeal are the
affections and the sentiments primarily. Such motives as property,
power, expediency and others of Similar character could hardly play a
prominent place in solving the problem that em’sted, inasmuch as Paul's
entire gosPel stresses loftier impulses than these, and because the
Situation revolved around attitudes to a person rather than to things.

On close examination it will be found that every chapter of the
epistle, except the two relative to the Offering, appeals to the affections
of love and sympathy and to the sentiment of gratitude. Some Of these
passages have already been referred to in the discussion of their logical
significance. Now they are considered with reference to their content
of pathetic proof. Their close relationship to ethical proof will be dis-

cus sed separately.

Chapter One

 

For we would not, brethren, have you ignorant Of our trouble
which came to us in Asia, that we were pressed out of measure,
above strength, insomuch that we deSpaired even of life: but we
had the sentence of death in ourselves, that we should not trust

 

lThonssen and Baird, p. 361.

 

222.

in ourselves, but in God which raiseth the dead: who delivered
us from so great a death, and cloth deliver: in whom we trust
that he will yet deliver us; ye also helping together by prayer

for us. vs 8-11

Here Paul alludes to the riot at Ephesus and his own proximity to death.
The picture is drawn of a man so surrounded by trouble that there are
no visible Signs of help. He attributes his deliverance not only to the
goodness of God but also to the effectiveness of the prayers of those

to whom he is now writing. Hereby Paul implies the existence of the
genuine love which many at Corinth held for him. He tenders his
gratitude for their intercessions, and thus encourages the continuance
of such. Thus also his friends would be Spurred on to defend the
absentee Apostle. He continues:

For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that
in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but
by the grace of God, we have had our conversation in the world,
and more abundantly to you-ward. For we write none other
things unto you, than what ye read or acknowledge; and I trust
ye shall acknowledge even to the end; as also ye have acknowl-
edged us in part, that we are your rejoicing, even as ye also
are our's in the day Of the Lord Jesus. vs 12-14

Thus the Corinthians are reminded of the upright behaviour Of the
Apostle when among them. Furthermore, they are assured that Paul's
joy at the time of the second advent would lie in the fact of their salva-
tion in (that day. It is a parallel statement to the one addressed to the
Thessalonians when Paul declared "Ye are our glory and joy. " By the
relating of his troubles in Asia, and by the references to the mutual
love between himself and the Corinthians, Paul in this chapter has

endeavored to tighten the cords of such affections.

223

Chapter Two

 

But I determined this with myself, that I would not come again
to you in heaviness. For if I make you sorry, who is he then
that maketh me glad, but the same which is made sorry by me ?
. For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote
unto you with many tears; not that ye Should be grieved, but that

ye might know the love which I have more abundantly unto you.
vs 1-4

It is noteworthy that the Apostle's primary method Of arousing
the affections Of the Corinthians is to demonstrate his own love towards
them. The words above portray his reluctance to visit Corinth with
rebuke as his main purpose. Instead he had sent a letter which had
been SO composed as to manifest the fact that he desired only their
welfare, even when called by necessity to administer correction. His
anxiety regarding their condition is shown in verses 12 and 13.

Furthermore, when I came to Troas to preach Christ's gospel,
and a door was opened unto me of the Lord, I had no rest in my
Spirit, because I found not Titus my brother; but taking my
leave of them, I went from thence into Macedonia.

Although he had found the people at Troas responsive to his
preaching, Paul had left the city to seek Titus and his news regarding
the church at Corinth. Thus was demonstrated how large a place
these believers held in his heart. That the Corinthians should recipro-

cate this love automatically follows.

Chapter Three

 

. . . need we, as some others, epistles of commendation to
you, or letters of commendation from you? Ye are our
epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men:
forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of
Christ ministered by us. . . . vs 1-3

Once more Paul "opens his heart, " as if to show that the Corin-

thians are engraved thereon. And he reminds them that the change

224

that has been wrought in their lives owed itself to him, as the human
instrunientality. They were indebted to the Apostle for the trans-

formation which all men recognized as having taken place in them.

Chapter Four

 

But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the
excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us. We are
troubled on every side, yet not distressed; we areperplexed,
but not in despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down,
but not destroyed; always hearing about in the body the dying
of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made
manifest in our body. For we which live are alway delivered
unto death for Jesus' sake, that the life also of Jesus might be
made manifest in our mortal flesh. So then death worketh in
us, but life in you. 4:7-12.

Again we have allusions to the many perils of the missionary life of
this Christian labourer. The last sentence particularly has pathetic
potency.

"You, " he seems to say, "reap the fruit of my sufferings. The
'dying' is all my own; you know nothing of that conflict with pain
and weakness; but the 'life' which is the result of that experi-
ence works in you as well as in me, and finds in you the chief
sphere of its operation. "1

The contrast expressed in this sentence would seem an effective one
for quickening the emotions of love, shame, and gratitude in those

who heard it.

Chapter Five

 

Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men;
but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made
manifest in your consciences. For we commend not ourselves
again unto you, but give you occasion to glory on our behalf,
that ye may have somewhat to answer them which glory in
appearance, and not in heart. For whether we be beside

 

lPlumptre, Ellicott, Vol. VII, p. 377.

 

225

ourselves, it is to God: or whether we be sober, it is for

your cause. For the love of Christ constraineth us. 5:11-14

Paul's own motives are here laid bare. It is his awareness of
the coming Judgment, and Of the love of Christ that compels him to
labor as he does. "And, " he assures the Corinthians, "all this
labor' is for your cause. ' " It is not for his exaltation, but for their
salvation that he labours; and that because of this the believers
should be well able to defend him against those ”which glory in appear-
ance, and not in heart. " This is another appeal for their love and
gratitude, with some delicate overtones which, if perceived, would

be likely also to work shame in those who heard the letter.

Chapter Six

 

In this chapter we have ”an outburst of impassioned eloquence"l
which culminates in the mo st direct appeal for genuine love from his
disciples towards himself that is to be found in the entire range of
Paul's epistles. The entire passage is worth quoting as it reveals the
approach to this high point Of p_at_hg_s.

We then, as workers together with him, beseech you also
that ye receive not the grace of God in vain. . . . Giving no
offence in anything, that the ministry be not blamed: But in all
things approving ourselves as the ministers of God, in much
patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses, in stripes,
in imprisonments, in tuxnults, in labours, in watchings, in
fastings; by pureness, by knowledge, by longsuffering, by kind-
ness, by the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned, by the word of
truth, by the power of God, by the armour of righteousness on
the right hand and on the left, by honour and dishonour, by evil
report and good report: as deceivers, and yet true; as unknown,
and yet well known; as dying, and, behold, we live; as chastened,
and not killed; as sorrowful, yet alway rejoicing; as poor, yet
making many rich; as having nothing, and yet possessing all
things. vs 1-10

 

lFarrar, St. Paul, p. 413.

 

226

0 ye Corinthians, our mouth is open unto you, our heart is
enlarged. Ye are not straitened in us, but ye are straitened
in your own bowels [affections]. vs 11, 12

There was manifestly a pause here [v 10] as the letter was
dictated. The rush of thoughts had reached its highest point.

He rests, and feels almost as if some apology were needed for
so vehement an outpouring of emotion. And now he writes as if
personally pleading with them. Nowhere else in the whole range
Of his epistles do we find any parallel to this form of speech--
this "0 ye Corinthians.” He has to tell them that if his mouth has
been Opened with an unusual freedom it is because his heart has
felt a more than common expansion. . . . There was no narrow-
ness in him. In that large heart of his there was room for them
and for a thousand others. It had, as it were, an infinite
elacticity in its sympathies. The narrowness was found in their
own "bowels"--i. e. , in their own affections. They would not
make room for him in those hearts that were so straitened by
passions, and prejudices, and antipathies. 1

In a discourse that is marked by emotion throughout, this entire passage
represents a 'high-water mark.' The picture here drawn of missionary
experience with its culminating series of paradoxes, and its final

appeal is cumulative in emotional effect. It is provocative of love

and admiration for the man who could endure such a life. The Corin-
thians could hardly fail to contrast their own experience with what is

described in these lines, and Shame would probably result for many.

Chapter Seven

 

In this chapter, as in the preceding, there are strong appeals
to the affections of love and sympathy. Here also such appeals are
made chiefly through a revelation of the Apostle's own love. He
addresses them as "dearly beloved, ” and continues:

Receive us; we have wronged no man, we have corrupted no
man, we have defrauded no man. I speak not this to condemn
you: for I have said before that ye are in our hearts to die and

 

 

”Plumptre, Ellicott, Vol. VII, p. 386.

227

live with you. . . . For, when we were come into Macedonia,
our flesh had no rest, but we were troubled on every side;
without were fightings, within were fears. Nevertheless, God,
that comforteth those that are cast down, comforted us by the
coming of Titus; and not by his coming only, but by the conso-
lation wherewith he was comforted in you, when he told us

your earnest desire, your mourning, your fervent mind toward
me; so that I rejoiced the more. . . . Wherefore, though I wrote
unto you, I did it not for his cause that had done the wrong, . . .
but that our care for you in the sight of God might appear unto
221i. . . . I rejoice therefore that I have confidence in you in

all things. 7: 1-16

 

 

These words were a continued revelation of the affection that Paul
held for the Corinthians. He stressed the suspense he endured in
Macedonia while he awaited news of them, and the joy at last when the
good news came. The chief reason for his first letter is mentioned,

namely, that his love towards them might be made manifest.

Chapter Eight

 

In this chapter and the following we have Paul's appeal on behalf
of the poverty- stricken believers at Jerusalem. He no longer appeals
for himself as in the earlier chapters. His main aim now is to motivate
the believers at Corinth to give liberally in the coming collection.

This he does by citing the example of the Macedonian givers, by
reminding them that Christ was the greatest of givers, by intimating
that some day they may be helped by the contributions of others, and
by appealing to their desire for social approval. The motive of self-
preservation is addressed by Paul's reminder that God is able to more

than make up to them all that they give.

Appeal to Emulation

 

Moreover, brethren, we do you to wit of the grace of God
bestowed on the churches of Macedonia; how that in a great
trial of affliction the abundance of their joy and their deep

228

poverty abounded unto the riches of their liberality. For to
their power, I bear record, yea, and beyond their power they
were willing of themselves; praying us with much intreaty that
we would receive the gift. . . . Therefore as ye abound in
every thing, in faith, and utterance, and knowledge, and in all
diligence, and in your love to us, see that ye abound in this
grace also. vs 1-7

It is significant that even in this passage Paul urges the love of the
Corinthians for himself as another motivating factor for their generosity.
His words are carefully chosen. When Speaking of liberality, he calls
it a ”grace. " The literal meaning of this word is "gift. " It is particu-
larly applied in the New Testament to the generous attitude of God
towards sinners. In this immediate context we read Of "the grace of
our Lord Jesus Christ, " and this grace was revealed by the fact "that,
though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through
his poverty might be rich. " Thus Paul infers that the attitude which he
is encouraging is itself born of God, the original Giver. Inasmuch as
the church abounds in other graces such as faith and knowledge, the
Apostle urges that a demonstration of the further grace of liberality
will reveal a well-rounded Christian experience. Tactfully he inserts
the fact that he is not trying to command what their conduct Should be.
"I speak not by commandment, but by occasion of the forwardness of
others, and to prove the sincerity of your love. "

He is a sensitive man dealing with sensitive people; and he points
out that he is not giving orders which are not needed and would
mar the beauty of their liberality: he is giving his judgment as to
what is fitting and fair. 1

Thus this first section of the chapter, while stressing mostly the
motive of worthy emulation, includes subsidiary appeals to self-

reSpect, and their love for him and for Christ.

 

iplummer, The Cambridge Bible, p. 79.

 

229

Appeal to Self-preservation

 

For if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to
that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not. For I
mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened: but by an
equality that now at this time your abundance may be a supply
for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for
your want: that there may be equality: as it is written, He that
had gathered much had nothing over; and he that had gathered
little had no lack. vs 12-15
Paul is saying that God does not require of them to give more than is
possible. Giving is to be proportionate according to each man's
individual pecuniary position. Furthermore, the time may come when
the Corinthians will be on the receiving end, as other churches would
contribute to their need should the occasion arise. At the time of
the collecting of the manna, those who had gathered much shared with
those who had gathered little, and finally each had sufficient. Even so,
says Paul, should it be among Christians at this time. The same motive

of self-preservation is touched upon by Paul's description of the careful

plans for safeguarding the funds for Jerusalem. vs 17-22

Appeal to the Desire for Social Approval

Wherefore shew ye to them, and before the churches, the proof
of your love, and of our boasting on your behalf . . . For I know
the forwardness of your mind, for which I boast Of you to them
of Macedonia, that Achaia was ready a year ago; and your zeal
hath provoked very many. Yet have I sent the brethren, lest
our boasting of you Should be in vain in this behalf; that, as I
said, ye may be ready: lest haply if they Of Macedonia come
with me, and find you unprepared, ' we (that We Say not, ye)
should be ashamed in this same confidentboasting. 8: 24-9:4

Here it is intimated that if the Corinthians failed to live up to the
Apostle's boast concerning them, it would be a permanent disgrace.

Regarding the last verse, one commentator has written:

230

We are not to regard this little parenthesis (we say not ye,

. . .) as a mere pleasantry, but on the other hand as a delicate
attempt to stimulate their feelings of self-respect; Since the
shame would indeed be theirs if the Apostle's expression of
confidence in them Should not be borne out in fact. 1

Another writer says:

In this little sentence we may discover the extreme delicacy of
Paul's feelings, and the affectionate civility which characterized
his intercourse, but which are especially prominent in this most
personal Of all his Epistles. 2'

Further Appeal to the Motive of Self-preservation

 

Lest the Corinthians should feel that they are lessening their
financial security by their contributions, it is pointed out that their own
generosity will more than be paralleled by that of God, who will under-
take to guarantee their having sufficient for every need.

. . . He which soweth Sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and

he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully. Every
man as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly,
or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver. And God is
able to make all grace abound toward you; that ye, always having
all sufficiency in all things, may abound to every good work:

. . . Now he that ministereth seed to the sower both minister
bread for your food, and multiply your seed sown, and increase
the fruits of your righteousness. . . . 9:6-10

The forcefulness of the final sentence of this chapter should not be
overlooked. "Thanks be unto God for his unSpeakable gift. " Thus Paul
closes his appeal by a burst of praise concerning the blessings of
redemption made available by God's gift in Christ. The implication at
this time of these words is obvious. New Christians could not but

desire to follow the example of God in all things.

 

1Kling in Lange's Commentary, p. 152.

 

2W. F. Besser, cited by Kling in Lange's Commentary, p. 153.

 

231

In the final section of this discourse, the last four chapters,
Paul returns to the defense of his apostolic ministry. This defense
is more aggressive in nature than that found in the first seven
chapters. Despite this fact, we find similar motivation employed as
the Apostle solicited the response of love to his own great affection for
the church. In the tenth chapter Paul suggests that he will not boast
about labours in regions unknown to them as his opponents had done.
He will only remind them that they had the evidence of his effectual
labours among themselves at Corinth. His implication is that they
would never have received the gospel but for his own ministry.
Therefore of all men, Paul suggests that the Corinthians should love
him the most.

But we [Gk. emphatic] will not boast beyond limit, but will
keep—t—o the limits God has apportioned us, to reach even to you.
For we are not overextending ourselves, as though we did not
reach you; we were the first to come all the way to you with the
gOSpel of Christ. We do not boast beyond limit, in other men's
labours; but our hOpjis that as your faith increases, our field
among you may be greatly enlarged, so that we may preach

the gosPel in lands beyond you, without boasting of work
already done in another's field. 10: 13-16

Chapter Eleven

 

This chapter contains what Farrar calls "the most marvellous

fragment ever written of any biography. ”

. . . This is a fragment beside which, not merely the ordinary
biographies of comfortable Christians, but even the most im-
perilled lives of the most suffering saints shrink into insig-
nificance. It is the very heroism of unselfishneSS--the life of
an "Apostle of the Third Heaven. "I

This passage seems capable of exciting in the Corinthians such noble

sentiments as would inSpire them to follow the self-sacrificing example

 

lFarrar, Messages, p. 239.

232

of their founder. Even when we read it two thousand years after it
was dictated, admiration and the desire to emulate such a noble life
are awakened.

Are they ministers of Christ? . . . I am more; in labours more
abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequent,
in deaths oft. Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes
save one. Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned,
thrice I suffered Shipwreck, a night and a day I have been in the
deep; in journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of
robbers, in perils of mine own countrymen, in perils by the
heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in
perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; in weariness
and painfulness, in watching often, in hunger and thirst, in
fastings often, in cold and nakedness. Beside those things that
are without, that which cometh upon me daily, the care of all the
churches. vs 23-28

These verses describing the perils incident to loving missionary

service add emphasis to his earlier declarations of affection for the
Greek believers. He had affirmed "I am jealous over you with godly
jealousy, " and again later, ". . . because I love you not? God knoweth. "
vs 2, 11. It is difficult to imagine any more powerful motivation to love
and sympathy than such self-revelations as found in this and the preced-

ing chapters.

Chapter Twelve

 

Words that are wistful and tinged with sadness and disappointment
are to be found as the Apostle approaches his conclusion.

. . . I seek not yours, but you. . . . and I will very gladly
spend and be spent for you; though the more abundantly I love
you, the less I be loved. 12:14, 15

Such words were probably provocative of intense shame in those who
heard them. It is inferred that the Corinthians had miserably failed
in defending the one to whom they owed so much. They had been

prepared to countenance false teachers even when the latter attacked

233

the author of their Spiritual life. Paul certainly had a right to declare:
". . . for I ought to have been commended of you. " v 11 Despite

his disappointment in them, the Apostle still addresses the Corinthians
as his "dearly beloved. " ". . . we do all things, dearly beloved, for
your edifying. " v 19

Chapter Thirteen

 

The high point of pathetic appeal is now passed. Almost abruptly
the Apostle curtails his address. In this closing passage we have
additional implied rebukes of the Corinthians' failure towards him.

. . . if I come again, I will not Spare: since ye seek a proof
of Christ Speaking in me, . . . Examine yourselves, whether
ye' be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not that
J—esus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates ? But I trust
that ye Shall know that we are not reprobates. vs 2, 3, 5, 6

 

 

 

Throughout this discourse can be found no appeal to such motives
as selfish expedience, power, selfish gain, self-assertion, or their
like. The major emphasis throughout is upon the affections and senti-

ments, particularly love, sympathy, and gratitude.

Analysis of Ethos

 

It is apparent that the arguments with pathetic appeal quoted
from the first seven chapters and the last three have a close relation-
ship tO ethical proof. In the words of Thonssen and Baird:

* It is apparent that the distinction between emotional and ethical
proof is not always clear; and in some instances it may be
virtually nonexistent. Ethos and pathos have, indeed, much in
common. The speaker who establishes his own moral integrity
and imposes strictures upon that of his opponent is unquestion-
ably using both ethical and pathetic proof. He is establishing
credence’in his own probity and character, and, at the same time,

 

 

 

234

is predisposing the minds of the hearers toward the readier
acceptance of his cause.1 (Emphasis ours)

This is exactly the position with the arguments of second Corinthians.
Paul's main burden is to "establish his own moral integrity and impose
strictures upon his opponents. " Insofar as his pathetic proof reveals
his own character as one of worth, and his ability as superior, to
that extent at least such argument is also ethical in nature.

Let us consider first the arguments which have bearing upon his
character.

In general, a speaker focuses attention upon the probity of his
character if he (1) associates either himself or his message with
what is virtuous and elevated; (2) bestows, with pr0priety,
tempered praise upon himself, his client, and his cause;

(3) links the Opponent or the opponent's cause with what is not
virtuous; (4) removes or minimizes unfavorable impressions Of
himself or his cause previously established by his opponent;

(5) relies upon authority derived from his personal experience;
and (6) creates the impression of being completely Sincere in

his undertaking.2

We shall appraise Paul's arguments in the light of these canons. First,
does he "associate eitherhimself or his message with what is virtuous
and elevated? " Before answering this, it must be admitted that this
criterion is very limited in affording conclusive proof of the ethical
appeal of the speaker. It would be possible for even a reprobate to
mouth pious platitudes. Nevertheless, this canon has its place,
inasmuch as the indication Of what the speaker esteems will influence
his audience if its members already holds his system of values.

In the present instance Paul links hirnself and his message with the
Source of all virtue. In every chapter he refers to God, and in every

chapter except one he makes mention of Jesus Christ. There are over

 

1Thonssen and Baird, p. 386.
21bid., p. 387.

235

one hundred and twenty references to the Godhead in these thirteen
chapters. This is the cumulative total of the mentions made of the
Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. In each chapter there is an
average of nine such references. If the discourse gave evidence that
Paul's character was the reverse of pious, these one hundred and
twenty references could serve only to discredit him; but inasmuch
as the totality of evidence reveals him as devout, this constant men-
tion of Divinity strengthens his ethical proof.

The subsidiary topics discussed in this letter are also virtuous
and elevated in nature. Frequent references to the gospel and to the
truths of that gosPel can be found in each section of the message,
inextricably interwoven with the particular idea of each paragraph.
Minor themes include the sacredness of the Scriptures (2:17 etc.),
the lofty nature of the Christian ministry (chs 3 and 6), faith (5:7;
4:18), separation from evil (6: 14-18), the duty of Christian benevolence
(chs 8 and 9), and the purpose of suffering (1:3-10; 12:7-10 etc.).

It is apparent that Paul indeed associates himself and his message with
what is virtuous and elevated.

Does the Apostle "bestow, with pr0priety, tempered praise upon
himself, his client, and his cause"? Concerning himself, the Apostle
admits that the claims he has been constrained to make in this direction
are likely to be misinterpreted. He says "Would to God ye could bear
with me a little in my folly: and indeed bear with me. . . . Let no
man think me a fool; if otherwise, yet'as a fool receive me, that I
may boast myself a little. That which I speak, I Speak it not after the
Lord, but as it were foolishly, in this confidence of boasting. ”

11:1, 16, 17. He is well aware that "self-praise is no recommendation, "
and declares "For not he that commendeth himself is approved, but

whom the Lord commendeth. " 10:18 It seems obvious that the

236

business of defending himself is distasteful to the Apostle. He makes
clear the reason why he is making this effort to vindicate his character
and message.

As the truth of Christ is in me, no man Shall stop me of this
boasting in the regions of Achaia. Wherefore? because I love
you not? God knoweth. But what I do, that I will do, that I

may cut off occasion from them which desire occasion. 11:10-12

 

For we commend not ourselves again unto you, but give you

occasion to glory on our behalf, that ye may have somewhat

to answer them which glory in appearance, and not in heart.
5: 12

With the motive for his defense clearly stated, Paul seeks to vindicate
himself throughout the epistle by arguments and claims regarding the
purity of his character and intent. These we have considered in the
section dealing with the development of ideas in the letter. However,
some of the verses which particularly relate to this present topic
should be mentioned. In ch 2: 14-17 we have a summary of the ethical
Significance of the first chapters in Paul's defense. Having referred
to his ministry at Ephesus, and the "open door" at Troas, he exclaims:

Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in
Christ, and maketh manifest the savour of his knowledge by us
in every place. For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ,
in them that are saved, and in them that perish: to the one we
are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour
of life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things ? For we
are not as many which corrupt the word of God: but as of sin-
cerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

Thus Paul affirms that he is a successful instrument in the Hand of God,
ministering life to all who believe his message, and judgment to those
who disbelieve. His self-praise is tempered by the rhetorical

question: "Who is sufficient for these things?" The claim to sincerity
is a repetition of his words in the preceding. chapter in verse twelve:

For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience,
that in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom,

237

but by the grace of God, we have had our conversation
[conduct] in the world, and more abundantly to you-ward.

In the third chapter we have the claim to effective ministry reaffirmed
in the declaration that God has made him an "able minister of the new
testament. " v 6 The words immediately preceding were probably
intended to ward off the charge of boasting. "Not that we are sufficient
of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is
of God. " v 5 The verses quoted from this chapter Show that Paul
is concerned with vindicating his cause rather than merely himself.
It is the "new testament, " i. e. "the new covenant" of the gospel, with
which he is concerned. His own standing is important only inasmuch
as this affects the attitude of the Corinthians towards his message.

i In the next chapter are similar affirmations.

Therefore seeing we have this ministry, as we have received
‘mercy, we faint not; but have renounced the hidden things of
dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of
God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending
ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God. . . .
For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and
ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake. 4:1, 2, 5

Again in chapter seven and verse two:

Receive us; we have wronged no man, we have corrupted no
man, we have defrauded no man. I speak not this to condemn
you: for I have said before, that ye are in our hearts to die
and live with you.

And in chapter ten:

Now I Paul myself beseech you by the meekness and gentleness
of Christ. . . . For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war
after the flesh. . . . If any man trust to himself that he is
Christ's, let him of himself think this again, that, as he is
Christ's, even so are we Christ's. vs 1, 3, 7

In the following chapter Paul claims equality with the leaders among
the Twelve Apostles, and says that this is demonstrable by the quality

and extent of his knowledge and his service.

238

For I suppose I was not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles.
But though I be rude in Speech, yet not in knowledge; but we
have been throughly [thoroughly] made manifest among you in
all things.

. . . in labours more abundant, in stripes above measure, in
prisons more frequent, in deaths oft. . . . vs 5, 6, 23

As the climax to his claims Paul refers to his visions from God.

I must boast: there is nothing to be gained by it, but I will

go on to visions and revelations of the Lord. I know a man in
Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third
heaven--whether in the body or out of the body I do not know,
God knows. And I know that this man was caught up into
Paradise. . . . and he heard things that cannot be told, which
man may not utter. 12:1-4 RSV

The miracles he had worked are alluded to in confirmation of his
apostleship.

The signs of a true apostle were performed among you in all
patience, with signs and wonders and mighty works. v 12 RSV

Lest once more these statements should be construed as vain boasting,
Paul closes his defense with the words:

Again, think ye that we excuse ourselves unto you? We Speak
before God in Christ: but we do all things, dearly beloved, for
your edifying. 12:19

Thus there seems to be ample evidence that the Apostle bestows "with
prOpriety, tempered praise upon himself, . . . and his cause. "

Does Paul "link the opponent or the opponent's cause with what
is not virtuous?" Many of Paul's references to his critics are asides
rather than direct attack. For example he asks: "DO we begin again

to commend ourselves? or need we, as some others, epistles of

 

commendation to you. . . . " 3:1 And again, "For we dare not make
ourselves of the number, or compare ourselves with some that commend
themselves: but they measuring themselves by themselves, and com-
paring themselves among themselves, are not wise. " 10: 12 Paul's

main method of repudiating the character of his Opponents is to evidence

239

his own purity of motive and his diligence in service. Thus he sug-
gests a contrast with the critics which was likely to have proved
painful to them. However, towards the end of his discourse, the
Apostle directly links the Opposition and its cause with the very
personification of wickedness, Satan himself.

For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming
themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for
Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore
it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the
ministers Of righteousness; whose end shall be according to
their works. 11:13-15

And with bitter irony he adds references to the behaviour of the Judaizing
teachers.

For ye suffer fools gladly, seeing ye yourselves are wise.

For ye suffer, if a man brings you into bondage, if a man devour
you, if a man take of you, if a man exalt himself, if a man
smite you on the face. vs 19, 20

Thus does Paul link his opponents "with what is not virtuous. "

The next canon for estimating effective demonstration of a
Speaker's good character is to enquire whether he "removed Or mini-
mized unfavourable impressions of himself or his cause previously
established by his opponent. " Most of the section concerning the
development of ideas has application at this point. AS has been men-
tioned, this whole discourse has for its chief end the defense of Paul.
Thus ethical argument predominates throughout rather than constitut-
ing a minor factor as in many secular Speeches. (This should not
be understood as implying that ethical proof is "minor" in importance
in gauging the persuasive value of any Speech. We believe the contrary
to be the case.) Most of this address to the Corinthian believers
consists of rebuttal of the accusations made by the schismatics against

the Apostle's person, character, and teaching.

240

Has Paul "relied upon authority derived from his personal
experience, and created the impression of being completely Sincere
in his undertaking?" These last criteria find fulfillment in verses
already quoted. In the first chapter, Paul referred to his experience
at Ephesus, and the Divine deliverance which came to him there.

In the second chapter, the successful preaching at Troas was mentioned.
Thereafter, we have references to the results of the Apostle's preach-
ing among the Corinthians themselves (chs 3, 10, and 11 particularly)
and also concise summaries of his missionary labours (such as in
11:22-33, and 10: 13-16). In such passages Paul emphasizes the
authority that was rightly his as a result of a divinely-attended ministry.
The epistle as a whole breathes the spirit of sincerity, and such verses
as the following are typical of the Apostle' S attitude towards his
hearers.

Our mouth is open unto you, Corinthians; our heart is wide.
You are not restricted by us, but you are restricted in your
own affections. In return--I speak as to children--widen
your hearts also. 6: 10-13 RSV

Behold, the third time I am ready to come to you; and I will
not be burdensome to you: for I seek not your's, but you:

for the children ought not to lay up for the parents, but the
parents for the children. And I will very gladly Spend and be
spent for you; though the more abundantly I love you, the less
I be loved. 12:14,15

The emphasis throughout upon the sufferings and toils of Paul also
suggests the impression of his absolute sincerity.

Thus far, under the heading of ethical proof, we have considered
the indications in 2 Corinthians of the probity of Paul's character.
Aristotle suggested that a second feature inSpiring belief is "sagacity. "
The more modern term is "competence. "

With certain qualifications varying with the circumstances, it
may be said that a Speaker helps to establish the impression
of sagacity if he (1) uses what is popularly called common sense;

241

(2) acts with tact and moderation; (3) displays a sense of good
taste; (4) reveals a broad familiarity with the interests of the
day; and (5) shows through the way in which he handles Speech
materials that he is possess of intellectual integrity and
wisdom. I

Let us consider this discourse with reference to these canons
concerning "competence. " First of all, does Paul manifest common
sense? It would seem apparent that one who can boast Of a missionary
record such as is several times referred to in this letter must of
necessity be gifted with common sense, in order to have survived
and to have accomplished so much.

It is, however, particularly in the business-like arrangements
which Paul describes with reference to the gifts of the believers, that
we see clear evidence of his common sense. He is manifestly con-
cerned not only that the Corinthians should develop philanthropic graces
but also that their donations should be cared for in such a way as to
avoid the appearance of evil and secondly, that the collection Should
safely reach its destination. To accomplish these ends, Paul has with
him fellow-labourers elected by various churches, who could act both
as auditors and guardians of the money collected.

With him (Titus) we are sending the brother who is famous
among all the churches for his preaching of the gOSpel; and not
only that, but he has been appointed by the churches to travel
with us in this gracious work which we are carrying on, for the
glory of the Lord and to Show our good will. We intend that no
one should blame us about this liberal gift which we are adminis-
tering, for we aim at what is honorable not only in the Lord's
sight but also in the sight of men. And with them we are sending
our brother whom we have often tested and found earnest in many
matters, but who is now more earnest than ever because of his
great confidence in you. As for Titus, he is my partner and
fellow worker in your service; and as for our brethren, they are
messengers of the churches, the glory of Christ. 8:18-23 RSV

 

1Thonssen and Baird, p. 387.

242

Are there evidences Of "tact and moderation" in this epistle?
Probably the greatest evidence Of tact to be found here is that the
Apostle's rebuke to those who listen to his accusers is clothed about
with fervid expressions of his own love for them. The epistle does
not begin with the main question agitating Paul. That is, he does not
commence by haranguing the Corinthians about their fickleness as
demonstrated by their harbouring of the Judaizing teachers. Instead,
Paul seeks to win their affection by referring to the trials he has
had at Ephesus. He does not rail against his enemies but instead
reveals his moderation by the fact that his allusions to these are mainly
"on the side. " Furthermore, when he refers to his own self-sacrific-
ing ministry among the Corinthians, he chooses to speak in the general
terms of a moderate spirit rather than so to delineate his sacrifices
on their behalf as to multiply their Shame (See 11:7-10 and 12:13).

Paul further demonstrates his tact by evincing a confidence in
the Corinthians which they hardly seem to have merited.

For we write none other things unto you, than what ye read or
acknowledge; and I trust ye Shall acknowledge even to the end;
as also ye have acknowledged us in part, that we are your
rejoicing, even as ye also are our's in the day of the Lord
Jesus. And in this confidence I was minded to come unto you.
. . . Not for that we have dominion over your faith, but are
helpers of your joy: for by faith ye stand. 1:13-15, 24

I rejoice therefore that I have confidence in you in all things.
7:16

For as touching the ministering to the saints, it is superfluous
for me to write to you: for I know the forwardness of your mind,
for which I boast of you to them of Macedonia, that Achaia was

ready a year ago; and your zeal hath provoked very many. . . .
9: 1, 2

The third criterion of competence suggested by Thonssen and
Baird is the possession of good taste. How does Paul stand in this

regard? His sensitivity regarding "boasting" in his own behalf is an

243

indication of "good taste. "

Would to God ye could bear with me a little in my folly. . . .
That which I Speak, I Speak it not after the Lord, but as it
were foolishly, in this confidence of boasting. . . . I am
become 'a fool in glorying. . . . 11:1, 17; 12:11

These words infer that it is odious to Paul to be compelled to defend
in this way himself and his ministry. He does so in order to protect
the flock at Corinth, that they might be able to vindicate him against
those who deSpised him.

The delicacy of appeal found throughout this discourse is a further
indication of good taste. Paul does not administer "sledge-hammer"
blows of recrimination. He appeals to the highest affections, sympathy,
love, and gratitude. Nowhere does he cater to what he would have
called "the flesh. ”

Does Paul "reveal a broad familiarity with the interests of the
day? " If by "interests of the day" we mean national or international
events, the answer must be "No. " If, however, we understand this
expression to mean whatever things held most interest for his listeners,
then the answer must be otherwise. Paul shows an amazing familiarity
with the precise charges against him which are agitating the minds of
those whom he addresses. He Specifically alludes to almost twenty of
these. Furthermore he applies his message so as to answer other
questions of interest to this church. He discusses his next visit to
them, and gives counsel regarding matters of immediate duty such as
the collection for the poor believers of Judea. The news of his own
experiences since last he wrote to them is also passed on. Throughout
the epistle, Paul reveals an intimate knowledge of the ways of God,
and of the significance of the gospel. Thus his competence in matters

of eternal interest as well as in ephemeral affairs is indicated.

244

Finally, we would ask in this discussion of Paul's competence,
"does he Show by the way in which he handles Speech materials that
he is possessed of intellectual integrity and wisdom?" Probably the
section describing the develOpment of ideas offers the best answer
to the present question. There we noted that Paul chose major argu-
ments easily supported from the experiences of himself and the
Corinthians, and substantiated by Scripture. He reasoned deductively
from premises that the Corinthians already accepted on the basis of
the sacred writings of revelation. As Christ, the chosen of God, had
followed a career marked by suffering as well as by power, so had
Paul. As Christ had demonstrated by an upright, Open life His holy
character, so had Paul. As those who had accepted the preaching of
Christ were convinced that He came from God, SO should the Corinthians,
who had experienced transformation of life through the gOSpel brought
by Paul, acknowledge him as a messenger of the Almighty.

The third constituent of ethical proof is evidence of the good-
will Of the Speaker.

Finally, a speaker's good will generally is revealed through
his ability (1) to capture the proper balance between too much
and too little praise of his audience; (2) to identify himself
prOperly with the hearers and their problems; (3) to proceed
with candor and straightforwardness; (4) to Offer necessary
rebukes with tact and consideration; (5) to offset any personal
reasons he may have for giving the speech; and (6) to reveal,
without guile or exhibitionism, his personable qualities as a
messenger of the truth. 1

To consider each of these criteria in detail would be to repeat
much of what has already been said. However, some applications at
least Should be made demonstrating Paul's revelation of good-will

towards his hearers. At the very beginning of his discourse he rejoices

 

1Thonssen and Baird, p. 387.

245

that his own sufferings will ultimately result in furthering the
"consolation and salvation" of the Corinthians (1:6). When in the
next chapter he explains why he has not yet visited Corinth for the
second time, he uses words of love and affection to demonstrate that
his decision was made for their benefit.

For I made up my mind not to make you another painful visit.
For if I cause you pain, who is there to make me glad but the
one whom I have pained? And I wrote as I did, so that when I
came I might not be pained by those who Should have made me
rejoice, for I felt sure of all Of you, that my joy would be the
joy of you all. For I wrote you out of much affliction and
anguish of heart and with many tears, not to cause you pain but
to let you know the abundant love that I have for you. 2:1-4 RSV

 

In the third chapter he declares that they are written on his
heart in such a way that all men can perceive his love for them.

Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of
all men. 3: 2

The Spontaneous outburst of affection in 6:11, 12, where the Apostle
declares that his heart is enlarged to receive them all, is as revelatory
of his good will as is also the declaration towards the close of the
letter when he states his readiness to "spend and be Spent" for them
although it. seemed that the more abundantly he loved, the less return
of affection he received (12:15).

It should perhaps be emphasized again that we consider that the
manner and nature of the development of ideas in this letter to constitute -
the primary ethical proof of the discourse, rather than mere side
expressions or allusions. Ethical proof is inherent in the warp and
woof of this address, and only the reading of the whole can imply the
total impression probably made upon the Corinthians by this apologetic
from the founder of their church. We would Suggest that this total
impression did not have reference so much to doctrine or duty as to

the character and authority of the Apostle Paul.

246

Analysis of Arrangement

 

This epistle is the least systematic of all the letters of Paul.
The theme of vindicating his apostolic ministry is clearly defined,
but it is impossible to formulate an outline of orderly sequential
thought from these chapters. So much is this the case that many
critics have gone so far as to suggest that we have here the remnants
of more than one letter placed together for convenience. However as
one well-known commentator has remarked:

Even if the connection between the different parts of our Epistle
were more indistinct, and the transitions from the one to the
other were much more abrupt than they actually are. . . . they
ought to awaken no surprise in an Epistle [composed in the

midst of a journey, under overwhelming cares and circumstances
of extraordinary vicissitude, by a writer of more than common
sympathies, and with reference to classes of persons so different
as were the sincere but erring brethren at Corinth and their
corrupt and schismatical seducers. And yet, notwithstanding the
varieties of subject and tone which are found in our Epistle, the
whole is pervaded by a Single purpose and spirit, the Object of
which was to heal the divisions which had commenced and
threatened such serious consequences in the church, and to
establish believers there in their former confidence in Paul.

We discover nothing but the various actings of the same mind in
its necessary changes, while contemplating what it loves and
what it abhors; and the very fact that some passages in our
Epistle have been fitted into their connections with so little an
appearance of design, indicates that they were the natural out-
pouring Of a Spontaneous butconflicting emotion. ]1

This last line gives us the reason for the apparent lack Of orderly
development in this discourse. There is indeed a very evident unity

to be found, but it is a unity of feeling and tone and purpose. It is not
a unity of categories or divisions inasmuch as the letter was dictated
from one in a storm of emotion. The news brought by Titus concerning

the reformation of the greater number at Corinth, and the upsetting

 

1Kling in Lange's Commentary, Vol. 21, pp. 2, 3.

 

 

 

247

tidings of the accusations of the schismatic Judaizing teachers had
stirred Paul to his depths.

Joy, affection, tenderness, fiery indignation, self-vindication,
profound thoughts as to the mysteries of the kingdom of God
which flashed upon his soul as he spoke--all these elements
were there, craving to find expression. They hindered any
formal plan and method in the structure of the Epistle. They

. led to episodes, and Side-glances, and allusive references
without number. 1 ‘

Despite the impossibility of tracing with some regularity the
connections between the manifold ideas of this Epistle there are three
obvious divisions.

l. The description of the Christian ministry. Chs 1-7

2. The admonition regarding the collection for the believers in

Judea. Chs 8-9

3. The vindication of Paul's apostolic authority. Chs 10-13

Regarding the introduction, we find that it fulfills the main pur-
poses of this part of a discourse. It seeks to enlist the attention and
interest, and it aims at prediSposing the audience favourably towards
the one who addresses them. By his immediate reference to the tumult
at Ephesus, and the providential purpose in that event, Paul probably
obtained at once the attention, interest, and favour of the believers at
Cori nth. The conclusion does not follow the classical mode; but as
we consider the closing chapter, we find that it accomplishes the
following purposes which are not inappropriate.

' l. The theme of the whole is reiterated. ("Since ye seek a proof
of Christ Speaking in me. . . . " v 3)

2. The emotions of the Corinthians are aroused by a sudden

reversal of thought as Paul warns them to examine themselves

to see whether they are "in the faith. " (v 5)

'Plumptre , in Ellicott, Vol. VII

 

 

Style

 

248

3. It makes further references to Paul's love for them.(vs 9, 10)
4. Additional exhortation regarding genuine Christian conduct
is given. (v 11)

5. Benediction. (v14)

While Paul's style is considered in a separate chapter, the

following quotations are applicable concerning his particular style in

this letter.

The excitement and interchange of the affections, and probably
also the haste under which Paul wrote the Epistle, certainly
render the expressions often obscure and the constructions dif-
ficult; but they serve only to exalt our admiration of the great
oratorical delicacy, art and power with which this outpouring
of Paul's Spirit, eSpecially interesting as a self-defence, flows
and streams onward, till its billows finally overflow the whole
opposition of his adversaries. l

. . . the difficulty of graSping the precise mind of this divine
rhetorician far exceeds that which is felt in comprehending that
of ordinary poets and orators; that he is so full of turns and
delicate allusions, that one is constantly at a loss to know what
he is doing, whither he is driving, and what he is opposing.

SO skilful are his arts that you can hardly believe he is at
different times the same man. Now he boils up like a limpid
Spring, suddenly he rolls away with a great noise like a mighty
torrent bearing all before it, and then he flows gently along, or
expands like a placid lake over all the land. Sometimes he quite
loses himself as it were in the sand, but all at once he breaks
out at some unexpected point.z

Results

Concerning the reception of Paul's message we have no detailed

knowledge. In some passages of the New Testament written at a later

__

1Meyer cited by Kling, Lange's Commentary, Vol. 21, p. 5.

 

2Erasmus cited by Kling, ibid.

249

date, however, we have indications that the second epistle to the
Corinthians met with favourable results.
Writing to the Romans a few months later, Paul declared:

For it hath pleased them of Macedonia and Achaia to make a
certain contribution for the poor saints which are at Jerusalem.
It hath pleased them verily; and their debtors they are. For if
the Gentiles have been made partakers of their Spiritual things,
their duty is also to minister unto them in carnal things.

Rom 15:26, 27

Here is a direct reference to the successful fulfillment of the
project suggested by Paul in the eighth and ninth chapters of 2nd
Corinthians. Writing a little later, Paul can twice declare that the
believers at Achaia (the Corinthians) have been pleased to make their
contribution.

Also from Romans we learn that one of the most prominent
members of the Corinthian church was host to Paul at the time he wrote
this later letter.

Gaius mine host, and of the whole church, saluteth you.
Erastus the Chamberlain of the city saluteth you, and Quartus
a brother. Rom 16:23

Apparently Gaius, who had at one time or another exercised hospitality
towards most of the Corinthian believers, had reflected to the Apostle
the love of the entire church. In this verse also the greetings of other
Corinthians are passed on to the Roman church, including a greeting
from one who held an official position at Corinth, and who later became
a fellow minister of Paul's.

In the record of Acts we read of Paul's visit to Corinth after the
deSpatch of the second letter, and we learn that he stayed with the
believers for three months. There is no hint of discord, but there is
a reference which indicates that the Apostle so shared the confidence
of the church that it did not consider it necessary to choose delegates

of its own to watch over the appr0priation of the funds they had contributed.

250

. . . he came unto Greece, and there abode three months.
And when the Jews laid wait for him, as he was about to sail
into Syria, he purposed to return through Macedonia. And
there accompanied him into Asia SOPater of Berea; and of the
Thessalonians, Aristarchus and Secundus; and Gaius of Derbe,
and Timotheus; and of Asia, Tychicus and TrOphimus.

Acts 20:2-4

From this reference it would seem that it was only the threat from
Jews of the synagogue which caused Paul to leave the Corinthians on
this occasion. While delegates from the other contributing churches
are mentioned as accompanying him, apparently the Corinthians did
not consider it necessary to have one of their own number share the
guardianship of the funds.

It may also be significant that after his first imprisonment
Paul again visited Corinth. 2 Tim 4: 20 makes reference to the fact
that a native Corinthian Erastus, (referred to in Rom 16:23) remained in
the city at that time because of illness. These later visits mentioned
in Acts and 2 Timothy suggest a probable restoration of harmony
between the Apostle and the church at Corinth.

The commentator Plummer sums up the evidence in the following
words:

As to the results of these appeals and exhortations we have no
direct evidence; but we may infer that they were in the main
successful. The Epistle to the Romans, written from Corinth

a few months later, seems to have been composed in a tranquil
atmosphere; and if the Church of Corinth had again given serious
trouble to S. Paul we should probably have some traces of the
disaffection either in Romans or in other writings. When Clement
of Rome wrote to the Church of Corinth c. A. D. 95 he has to
criticize some failings, but nothing so grave as a rejection of
apostolic teaching. Hegesippus (c. A.D. 160) found it continuing
in the faith, and says that he and they were mutually refreshed in
the true doctrine (Eus H. E. IV xxii. 1, 2). A little later the
letters of Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth, were so valued that
heretics thought it worth their while to garble them (Eus. H. E.
IV. xxiii. 12).

 

1Plummer, Cambridge Bible, xxi,xxii.

 

251

V. THE DISCOURSE TO THE GALATIANS

Written with no thought that it would become scripture to be
read for thousands of years, this short letter Speaks to the
supreme need of all men in all times. 1

The Epistle to the Galatians

 

. . . If we would understand Galatians aright, we must think of
it, not primarily as a theological treatise, but as the passion-
ate outpouring Of the apostle's soul in vindication of the gospel
which he has been commissioned to preach, and of the faith
which has made all things new for himself.2

The Epistle is polemical, impetuous, and overpowering; and yet
tender, affectionate and warning in tone. It strikes like light-
ning every projecting point that approaches its path, and yet
undelayed by these zigzag deflexions, instantaneously attains
the goal. Every verse breathes the spirit of the great and free
Apostle of the Gentiles. His earnestness and mildness, his
severity and love, his vehemence and tenderness, his depth and
Simplicity, his commanding authority and Sincere humility, are
here vividly brought before us in fresh and bold outlines.3

It was necessary that the particularism of Judaism, which ex-
posed to the heathen world so repellent a demeanour, and such
offensive claims should be uprooted, and the baselessness of its
prejudices and pretensions fully exposed to the world's eye.
This was the service which the Apostle achieved for mankind by
his magnificent dialectic.4

In vehemence, effectiveness, and depth of conviction this Epistle
is only paralleled by Luther's De Captivitate Babylonica, in which
he realised his saying that his battle with the Papacy required

"a tongue of which every word is a thunderbolt. "5

 

 

lRaymond T. Stemm, "Galatians, " Interpreter's Bible, Vol. 10,
p. 429.

2George S. Duncan, The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians (Series,
no volume numbers) The Moffatt New Testament Commentary (London:
Hodder and Stoughton, 1934), p. xlvii.

 

 

 

3Schaff, Lange's Commentary, Vol. 22, p. 9.

 

4Baur, cited by Farrar, Messages, pp. 248-249.

 

5Farrar, Messages, p. 250.

 

252

To the bigoted few, every one of these prOpositions would seem
to be a startling and Offensive paradox. It requires no small
knowledge of history fully to realise the Splendid originality,
the superb courage, required for the enunciation of such
Opinions . 1

It [the epistle to the Galatians] was the manifesto of that spiritual
reformation which was involved in the very idea of Christianity.
More than any book which was ever written these few pages
marked an epoch in history. . . . the words scrawled on those
few Sheets of papyrus were destined to wake echoes which have
lived, and shall live for ever and for ever. Savonarola heard
them and Wiclif [sic], and Huss, and Luther, and Tyndale, and
Wesley. They were the Magna Charta of spiritual emancipation.

2
One of the greatest of Pauline scholars, Dean Farrar, has
asserted that " it requires much thought and study to feel the force and
beauty of a letter of which almost every sentence is a thunderbolt, and
of which every word, when one understands it, is alive. "3 Thus does

this scholar refer to the address to the Galatians, an address which
more than any. other of Paul's letters reveals him as a great orator.
Because this discourse is so evidently one whose intent is persuasion,
and whose content Springs from a specific emergency situation, it is

futile to attempt criticism of it without an extensive study of its histori-

cal context.

The Occasion

 

The essence Of the problem behind this letter is the relationship
between Judaism and Christianity. Christianity had begun with a Jew,
it had been proclaimed by Jewish apostles, and its adherents cherished

the Jewish scriptures, and attended the Jewish synagogues. Was

 

1Farrar, Messages, p. 263.
21bid., p. 258.
31bid.

 

253

Christianity to be but another cult of Judaism? If so it would be re-
stricted to the ghettos and probably would never become a world
religion.

Did the early Christians have a clear vision of their universal
work? Apparently not. After Luke has referred to the appearances of
the risen Christ, he records this question of the disciples. "Lord,
wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? " Acts 1:6
The Apostles apparently still looked for a Jewish dominion of the world.
Christ's reply to their question was: ”. . . ye shall receive power
after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses
unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto
the uttermost part of the earth." Acts 1:8

Here was a command for the prosecution Of a world-wide work,
but there was no clue as to whether this world-wide gosPel was to be
offered as from "the old wine-bottles" of Judaism, or whether the
"new wine" of the gosPel required also "new bottles" to contain it,
(Matt 9: 17). Was every convert from a pagan nation to be circumcised
as a Jewish pros elyte before being admitted to the love-feast of the
Christians? Were the tenets of the ceremonial laws of the Torah
binding upon believing Gentiles ? Stalker aptly summarizes the problem
in the following quotation.

It had pleased God in the primitive times to choose the Jewish
race from among the nations and make it the repository of
salvation; and, till the advent of Christ, those from other nations
who wished to become partakers of the true religion had to seek
entrance as proselytes within the sacred enclosure of Israel.
Having thus destined this race to be the guardians of revelation,
God had to separate them very completely from all other nations
and from all other aims which might have distracted their atten-
tion from the sacred trust which had been committed to them.
For this purpose he regulated their whole life with rules and
arrangements intended to make them a peculiar pe0p1e, different

254

from all other races of the earth. Every detail of their life--
their forms of worship, their social customs, their dress,
their food--was prescribed for them; and all these prescrip-
tions were embodied in that vast legal instrmnent which they
called the law. The rigorous prescription of SO many things
which are naturally left to free choice was a heavy yoke upon
the chosen pe0ple; it was a severe discipline to the conscience,
and such it was felt to be by the more earnest Spirits of the
nation.

But others saw in it a badge of pride; it made them feel
that they were the select of the earth and superior to all other
pe0ple; and, instead of groaning under the yoke, as they would
have done if their consciences had been very tender, they multi-
plied the distinctions Of the Jew, swelling the volume of the
prescriptions of the law with stereotyped customs of their own.
To be a Jew appeared to them the mark of belonging to the
aristocracy of the nations; to be admitted to the privileges of
this position was in their eyes the greatest honor which could be
conferred on one who did not belong to the commonwealth of
Israel. Their thoughts were all pent within the circle of this
national conceit. Even their hopes about the Messiah were
colored with these prejudices; they expected Him to be the hero
of their own nation, and the extension of His kingdom they con-
ceived as a crowding of the other nations within the circle of
their own through the gateway of circumcision. They expected
that all the converts of the Messiah would undergo this national
rite and adopt the life prescribed in the Jewish law and tradition;
in short, their conception of Messiah's reign was a world of Jews.

Such undoubtedly was the tenor of pOpular sentiment in
Palestine when Christ came; and multitudes of those who accepted
Jesus as the Messiah and entered the Christian Church had this
set of conceptions as their intellectual horizon. They had become
Christians, but they had not ceased to be Jews; they still attended
the temple worship; they prayed at the stated hours, they fasted
on the stated days, they dressed in the style of the Jewish ritual;
they would have thought themselves defiled by eating with un-
circumcised Gentiles; and they had no thought but that, if Gentiles
became Christians, they would be circumcised and ad0pt the
style and customs of the Jewish nation. 1

 

lStalker, pp. 115-116.

255

The record of the early chapters of Acts describes the preach-
ing of the gospel in the places, and in the order, predicted by Christ.
First the preaching was at Jerusalem, then through all Judea, and
next in Samaria. But in the tenth chapter of this book we find a
Gentile, a Roman, knocking at the door of Peter, and asking for ad-
mission to the Church. Immediately prior to the arrival of the Roman
Cornelius, we are told that Peter was given a vision to instruct him
that he Should "not call any man common or unclean" Acts 10:28.

This apparently had the effect upon Peter of sufficiently relieving

him of his Jewish prejudices as to enable him to receive this Gentile
into Christian fellowship. Dean Farrar suggests some of the thoughts
in the mind of Peter as he contemplated this issue of the admission of
the Gentiles into the Church. We quote at some length because this is
a clear presentation of the reasoning behind the conclusions expressed
by Paul in the epistle to the Galatians.

For if Christ had said that He came to fulfil the Law, had He not
also said many things which Showed that those words had a
deeper meaning than the prima facie application which might be
attached'to them? Had He not Six times vindicated for the
Sabbath a larger freedom than the scribes admitted? Had He
not poured something like contempt on needless ceremonial
ablutions ? Had He not Himself abstained from going up thrice
yearly to Jerusalem to the three great festivals? Had He not
both by word and action, showed His light estimation of mere
ceremonial defilement, to which the Law attached a deep im-
portance? Had He not even gone so far as to say that Moses had
concedaisome things which were in themselves undesirable,
only because of the hardness of Jewish hearts? Had He not said,
"The Law and the Prophets were UNTIL JOHN?"

And, besides all this, was it not clear that He meant His
Church to be an Universal Church? Was not this universality
of the offered message of mercy and adoption clearly indicated
in the language of the Old Testament? Had not the Prophets
again and again implied the ultimate calling of the Gentiles ?
But if the Gentiles were to, be admitted into the number of saints
and brethren; if, as Jesus Himself had pr0phesied, there was to

 

256

be at last one flock and one Shepherd, how could this be if the
Mosaic Law was to be considered as of permanent and universal
validity? Was it not certain that the Gentiles, as a body, never
would accept the whole system of Mosaism, and never would
accept, above all, the crucial ordinance of circumcision?

Would not such a demand upon them be a certain way of ensuring
the refusal of the Gospel message? 01', if they did embrace it,
was it conceivable that the Gentiles were never to be anything

but more Proselytes of the Gate, thrust as it were outside the
portals of the True Spiritual Temple? If so, were not the most
primary conceptions of Christianity cut away at the very roots?
were not its most beautiful and essential institutions rendered
impossible? How could there be love-feasts, how could there be
celebrations of the Lord's Supper, how could there be the beautiful
spectacle of Christian love and Christian unity, if the Church was
to be composed, not of members joined together in equal brother-
hood, but of a proletariate of tolerated Gentiles, excluded even
from the privilege of eating with an aristocracy of superior Jews ?
Dim and dwarfed and maimed did such an ideal look beside the
grand conception of the redeemed nations of the world coming to
Sion, Singing, and with everlasting joy upon their heads'.

And behind all these uncertainties towered a yet vaster
and more eternal question. Christ had died to take away the sins
of the world; what need, then, could there be of sacrifices?
What significance could there be any more in the shadow, when
the substance had been granted? Where was the meaning of types,
after they had been fulfilled in the glorious Antitype? What use
was left for the lamp of the Tabernacle when the Sun of Righteous-
ness had risen with healing in His wings ? 1

Not all leaders of the infant Church saw the issue as clearly as
Peter and Paul. We read that:

. . . the apostles and brethren that were in Judaea heard that
the Gentiles had also received the word of God. And when Peter
was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision
contended with him, saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircum-
cised, and didst eat with them. Acts 11:1-3

Peter related to his critics the vision of the Sheet full of clean

and unclean beasts, whereby he had been made to understand that the

 

1Farrar, St. Paul, pp. 150-151.

257

Christian Church was to contain circumcised and uncircumcised alike.
He recounted the story of the visit of Cornelius with its denouement
of the receiving by the Gentiles of the gift of tongues.

'Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto
us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that
I could withstand God?

When they heard these things, they held their peace, and
glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted
repentance unto life. Acts 11:17, 18

Nevertheless we read also in the very next verse that:

. . . they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution

that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus,

and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only.
Acts 11:19

 

Evidently, the prejudices of the believers regarding the Gentiles were
not to be easily diSpersed.

It is at this stage that the persecutor Saul becomes Paul "the
apostle born out of due time. " 1 Cor 15:8 The Lord describes him as

"a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles. ”

 

Acts 9:15 Shortly after Peter's experience with Cornelius, Paul
began his apostolic work at Antioch, and soon afterwards set Off with
Barnabas upon the first missionary expedition into the Gentile world.
Wherever they preached, Paul and Barnabas accepted pagans into the
Christian Church without requiring circumcision or obedience to the
precepts of the Jewish ceremonial law.

. . . as a man who knew the world and whose heart was set on
winning the Gentile nations to Christ, he [Paul] felt far more
strongly than did the Jews of Jerusalem, with their provincial
horizon, how fatal such conditions as they meant to impose
would be to the success of Christianity outside Judaea. The
proud Romans, the highrninded Greeks, would never have con-
sented to be circumcised and to cramp their life within the
narrow limits of Jewish tradition; a religion hampered with such
conditions could never have become the universal religion. 1

 

1Stalker, p. 118.

258

Paul and Barnabas were not to go unchallenged. Upon returning
to Antioch after their first missionary tour, they found that Jewish
Christians from Jerusalem had come down to Antioch declaring to the
Gentile converts that without circumcision they could not hOpe for
salvation. Thus we have in the heart of the book of Acts the record of
group-discussion regarding this issue among the early Christian
leaders at the famous Council of Jerusalem. The Scriptural account
aptly reflects the tense atmOSphere with its Opposite elements of Jewish
provincialism and Christian Catholicism. This passage, more than
any other in the New Testament, casts light upon the ideological and
historical background of the letter to the Galatians.

And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the breth-
ren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of
Moses, ye cannot be saved. When therefore Paul and Barnabas
had no small dissension and disputation with them, they deter-
mined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should
go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this ques-
tion. And being brought on their way by the church, they passed
through Phenice and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the
Gentiles: and they caused great joy unto all the brethren. And
when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the
church, and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all
things that God had done with them. But there rose up certain
of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was
needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the
law of Moses.

And the apostles and elders came together for to consider
of this matter. And when there had been much diSputing, Peter
rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how
that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles
by my mouth Should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving
them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no dif-
ference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of
the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to
bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus
Christ we Shall be saved, even as they.

259

Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to
Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God
had wrought among the Gentiles by them.

And after they had held their peace, James answered
saying. Men and brethren, hearken unto me: Simeon hath
declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out
of them a peOple for his name. And to this agree the words of
the prophets; as it is written, After this I will return, and will
build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and
I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: That
the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the
Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who
doeth all these things. Known unto God are all his works from
the beginning of the world. Wherefore my sentence is, that we
trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned
to God: But we write unto them, that they abstain from pollu-
tions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled,
and from blood. For Moses of Old time hath in every city them
that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

Acts 15:1-21

This decision of the Council was in harmony with Paul's own
practice. The Gentiles were not to comply with the Jewish law of
circumcision, but it was advised that they abstain from foods offered
to idols. The reason for the latter probably was the common associ-
ation of licentiousness with the feasts which involved the use of foods
that had been presented to idols in heathen worship.

So deep-rooted, however, were the Jewish prejudices that not
even this decision of the Jerusalem council put an end to the diSpute.

Nor did the Opposition soon die down. On the contrary, it waxed
stronger and stronger. It was fed from abundant sources.
Fierce national pride and'prejudice Sustained it; probably it was
nourished by self-interest, because the Jewish Christians
would live on easier terms with the non-Christian Jews the less
the difference between them was understood to be; religious
conviction, rapidly warming into fanaticism, strengthened it;
and very soon it was reinforced by all the rancor of hatred and
the zeal of prOpagandism. For to such a height did this
opposition rise that the party which was inflamed with it at
length resolved to send out propagandists to visit the Gentile

260

churches one by one and, in contradiction to the official
apostolic rescript, warn them that they were imperilling their
souls by omitting circumcision, and could not enjoy the
privileges of true Christianity unless they kept the Jewish law.

’ For years and years these emissaries of a narrow-minded
fanaticism, which believed itself to be the only genuine Christian-
ity, diffused themselves over all the churches founded by Paul
throughout the Gentile world. Their work was not to found
churches of their own; they had none Of the original pioneer
ability of their great rival. Their business was to steal into the
Christian communities he had founded and win them to their own
narrow views. They haunted Paul's steps wherever he went, and
for many years were a cause to him of unsPeakable pain. They
whisPered to his converts that his version of the gosPel was not
the true one, and that his authority was not to be trusted.

Was he one of the twelve apostles? Had he kept company with
Christ? They represented themselves as having brought the
true form of Christianity from Jerusalem, the sacred head-
quarters; and they did not scruple to profess that they had been
sent from the apostles there. They distorted the very noblest
part of Paul's conduct to their purpose. 1

Thus does Stalker picture for us the Opposition to Paul's ministry,
and the ideology which caused such outbursts as the vehement letter
to the Galatians.

However, we would be in error if we assumed that this was the
only issue before Paul in his message to the Galatians. There is a
related issue, contingent upon the question of the relationship of
Christianity to Judaism but transcending it in importance. . To Paul's
mind, the basic problem of humanity had to do with relationship to God.
How could a man be at peace with the God he had offended by sin? How
could righteousness be Obtained? What was the path to peace of heart
and mind? Just what was the nature of true religion? Did religion
consist of external Observances or a change of heart and disposition?

Was justification to be found by ritual of form or revival of Spirit?

 

lStalker, pp. 120-121.

261

Was a man‘saved as a result Of his own works, or as a result of
accepting God's work for him? How could the Galatians be convinced
that their own works could never earn God's free gift? Every reader
Of the New Testament knows Paul's answer to these questions. If
there is one phrase in the Scriptures more Pauline than any other it
is "righteousness by faith." The doctrinal epistles have as their
basic theme "the just Shall live by faith. " Rom 1: 16

Dean Farrar expresses what he believes to be Paul's concept of
true religion in the following reference to the problem at Galatia.

Religion is a broad, deep, free, bright, loving, universal
spirit: broad as the path of God's commandments, deep as the
ocean of His love, free as His common air, bright as His
impartial sunshine, loving as His all-embracing mercy, univer-
sal as His omnipotent rule. For the centre, and head, and
heart of Christianity is Christ, and there was nothing narrow,
nothing scholastic, nothing jealously exclusive, in Christ.

But, in the craft and subtlety of the devil and man, Religion

has ever tended to wither away into Judaism, into Rabbinism,
into scholasticism, into ecclesiasticism, . . . into dead
schemes of dogmatic belief, into dead routines of elaborate
ceremonial, into dead exclusiveness of party narrowness, into '
dead theories of scriptural inspiration, into dead formulae of
Church parties, into the dead performance of dead works, or
the dead assent to dead phrases. Now it was just this fatal
tendency of human supineness against which Paul had to con-
tend. Judaic Christians--apparently one man in particular--
had come from Jerusalem to his fickle and ignorant Galations
with the hard, ready-made Biblical dogma "Unless ye be cir-
cumcised, and keep the whole law, ye cannot be saved. " They
wanted to substitute external badges for inward faith; legal
bondage for Christian freedom; Observance of practices for
holine-Ss of heart. They were striving to put the new, rich,
fermenting wine of Christianity into their old and bursten[sic]
wine-skins of Levitism. In their hands, Christianity would
have decayed into exclusiveness, self-congratulation, contempt
of others, insistence upon the outward, indifference tothe
essential-~a Christianity of the outward platter, a Christianity
of the whitened grave.l (Emphasis ours)

 

 

 

 

1Farrar, Messages, pp. 255-256.

 

262

Duncan concurs with the viewpoint expressed by Farrar and at the
same time affirms that this letter is not primarily a theological
treatise but a persuasive appeal from a challenged apostle.

The Epistle to the Galatians is not a theological treatise; it is

a religious appeal. Yet behind that appeal there lies a definite
outlook on life and destiny, an ordered system of thought on the
purposes and activities of God as these have been revealed in
Christ. Paul could not have pled as he does in Galatians if he
had not had a clear theology.

. . . in two important reSpects his doctrine of justification
differs from that of the Judaizers with whom he is in Opposition.
In the first place he insists that man can never win acceptance
by the due performance of the divine requirements--the transcen-
dent holiness of God and the depravity and servitude of man
combine to make that way of acceptance impossible. Man can-
not be justified by his own works but simply by faith in God.

In the second place acceptance need not be postponed till—that
final day when we stand before Christ for judgment: man may
be justified here and now, so soon as he turns to God in faith
and flings himself on God's mercy. 1

These, then, are the two basic issues in the letter to the Galatians,
the difference between Christianity and Judaism, and the nature of
genuine religion. The next problem, that of identifying the Specific

audience to whom the letter was addressed, is not as clear-cut.

The Audience

 

Who were the Galatians of this epistle? The term Galatia held
two different meanings in the days of Paul. Primarily the significance
of the word was an ethnological one referring to the section of Asia
Minor between the rivers Sangarius and Halys, and which was peOpled
mainly by the Celtic tribes. Nicomedes,‘ king of Bithynia, in the third

century B. C. had invited this warlike people to come from EurOpe to

 

1Duncan, pp. xxxiv-xliii.

263

Asia. They accepted the invitation, and for a period they fought the
battles of Nicomedes receiving from him a large strip of territory in
return. Not content with this, the Celts terrorised Asia Minor as far
as the Taurus mountains until confined to the original allotment of
country by the victories of the Kings of Pergames, particularly Attalus
I between 240 and 230 B.C.

When Rome Spread her conquests eastwards, this wild people
retained the status Of a dependent kingdom (189 B. C.); a century
and a half later the country passed into various hands, and
ultimately in 25 B. C. came to be governed under the Roman
provincial system. At the time of Paul the province which went
under the name of Galatia included the old kingdom of Galatia

to the north, and also parts of Lycaonia, Pisidia, and Phrygia
which adjoined it to the south. 1

Thus the second meaning for Galatia referred to the new Roman
province. Which of these meanings does Paul use when he Speaks of
the "foolish Galatians" (Gal 3: l) ? Was he writing to the descendents
of the Celtic tribes in the north of Asia Minor, or was he addressing
the churches of Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe located
in the south, and included in the Roman privince of Galatia?

Each of the alternative hypotheses, called the North Galatian
and the South Galatian theories respectively, has weighty scholarly
support. It is generally believed that the theories are mutually exclu-
sive, inasmuch as statements in the epistle suggest that the churches
addressed were founded at one and the same time. Either the churches
are those founded on the first missionary journey in South Galatia, or
they belonged to North Galatia and were established on the second journey
of Paul. S

The early Church Fathers and the mediaeval scholars believed

that Paul was addressing the churches in North Galatia. Since the end

 

—_

'Ibid. , pp. xviii-xix.

264

of the eighteenth century, however, there have arisen many scholars
expressing the South Galatian view. Lightfoot, Chase, Schmiedel,
Moffatt, Neander, Conybeare and Howson, Farrar, Godet, Mommsen,
Meyer, Alford, and Findlay appear among the famous names linked
with the former view, while Ramsay, Rendall, Woodhouse, Zahn,
Clemen, Weiss, and Lake support the latter.

There is a strong temptation for modern commentators to accept
the South Galatian view because it provides an account of the origin of
churches as described in the record of the first missionary tour. If,
however, this view is rejected, we have no details whatever as to the
founding of the Galatian churches, except that it took place probably
on the second missionary journey.

Farrar asserts:

It may be regarded as certain that by "Galatians"
St Paul meant the inhabitants of Galatia proper (the Trocmi,
Tectosages, Tolistoboii, with their three capital towns of
Tavium, Pessinus, and Ancyra). To speak of the Neo-Galatians
of the Roman province, which included Iconium, Lystra, and
Derbe as Galatians, would be like writing a letter "to the
Prussians, " which was Specially intended for the people of
Schleswig-Holstein, or Alsace and Lorraine. St. Luke never
dreams of calling Pisidia and Lycaonia by the name Galatia
(Acts xiv. 6, 11). 1

Burton, however, declares:

In view of all the extant evidence we conclude that the
balance of probability is in favour of the South- Galatian view. 1

To discuss the evidence for and against either position would
require a volume of large proportions, and inasmuch as scholars have

not come to unanimity on the matter, it would be presumptuous to

 

1Farrar, Messages, p. 247.

zErnest DeWitt Burton, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary
on the Epistle to the Galatians, Vol. 35 of The International Critical
Commentary (Edinburgh: T. 81 T. Clark, 1948), p. xliv.

 

 

 

265

assert here a dogmatic choice. We are comforted, however, by the
apposite remark of Burton to the effect that this issue is subsidiary
to other issues which are more easily settled.

It is fortunate for the interpreter to the letter to the Galatians
that while the location of the churches is in dispute and the

time and place of writing can be determined, if at all, only by

a balance of probabilities resting on indirect evidence, the
question for whose answer these matters are of chief importance,
can be decided with a good degree of certainty and on independent
grounds. The previous relations of the writer and his readers,
the circumstances that led to the writing of the letter, the pur-
pose for which it was written, these appear with great clearness
in the letter itself. 1

It should be noted that, as the above quotation implies, the
indefinite state of our knowledge regarding the exact definition of the
letter also affects our search for the time and place of origin of this
epistle. Those who hold the North Galatian view (believe that Paul
dictated the message about 57-58 A. D. probably from the city of
Corinth. The exponents of the alternative view believe the letter was
written about ten years earlier, perhaps from Ephesus.

Regarding the particular auditors Of this address and the date
the message was composed we would suggest in summary the following.

1. The audience was located either in North Galatia or in the

cities of Derbe, Lystra, and Iconium south of this area.
It is impossible to dogmatize regarding the priority of
either region.

2. The message was composed by Paul sometime between

A.D. 47 and A.D. 58.

3. DeSpite our lack of certainty regarding the geographical

location of the Galatians, their essential characteristics and

background are clearly indicated by the letter addressed

 

1Burton, p. liii.

(\

266

to them. Thus we have in the epistle itself sufficient
material to reconstruct, for purposes of rhetorical
criticism, the main lineaments of Paul's auditors.

We next inquire concerning what can be gleaned from the epistle
itself regarding the Galatians, their initial receipt of the gOSpel, and
their later defection.

The Galatians had been converted from heathenism, not from
Jewry. This is apparent from Paul's declaration that formerly they
had done service "unto them which by nature are no gods" Gal 4:8.
When Paul first ministered to them, the Galatians received him with
tremendous enthusiasm. They proved sympathetic towards Paul at
a time of illness on his part. The gospel had been presented in
C'hristocentric form, with emphasis laid upon transformation of heart
and life.as the result of genuine Christian faith. On no occasion had the
Apostle urged circumcision or any other requirement of the ceremonial
law upon his hearers. They had been baptized, and received the seal
of Spiritual gifts. Witnessing miracles in their midst, the Galatians
believed positively that the true God had spoken to them through the
gospel presented by Paul. The following verses from the letter make
reference to the early experience of these believers, and their relation-
ship to Paul and the substance of his preaching.

Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh'I preached the
gosPel unto you at the first. And my temptation which was in
my flesh ye deSpised not, nor rejected; but received me as an
angel of God, even as Christ Jesus. Where is then the blessed-
ness ye Spake of? for I bear you record, that, if it had been
possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have
given them to me. 4: 13-15 I

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made
us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
. . . For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any
thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.
Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the
truth? This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you.

5: 1-8

267

O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not
obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been
evidently set forth, crucified among you? This only would I
learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works Of the law,

or by the hearing of faith? Are ye so foolish? having begun in
the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh? 3: 1-3

Thus Paul refers to the initial attitude of these believers, and also the
later backsliding.

Not long before the writing of this letter, members of the Judaiz-
ing party in the Christian Church had visited the Galatian churches.
DeSpite the prevailing Christian Opinion expressed at the Council of
Jerusalem concerning the freedom of the Gentiles from the ceremonial
laws of Judaism, these Judaizers began to urge circumcision and its
accompaniments upon the new believers. The stress was legalistic
as well as Judaistic. It was taught that salvation was dependent upon
certain outward Observances. Judging from the trend of Paul's rebuttal,
the new teachers claimed that salvation was possible only to those who
were the descendents of Abraham by birth, or through adoption.
Inasmuch as circumcision was the rite committed to Abraham to dis-
tinguish the "elect" from the world, its performance was obligatory
upon every proselyte. The Galatians must submit to this initiatory
rite. Furthermore they should Observe the Jewish feast days. (See
1:9, 3:7, 9,14; 4:21-31; 4:10). Such were the claims of the Jewish
schismatics.

Besides these doctrinal features of the message of the Judaizers,
there was also the personal element of Opposition to Paul.

The letter itself furnishes evidence, which is confirmed by

1 and 2 Corinthians, that the apostolic office or function was
clearly recognized as one of great importance in the Christian
community, and that the question who could legitimately claim
it was one on which there was sharp difference of opinion. An
apostle was much more than a local elder or itinerant mission-
ary. He was a divinely commissioned founder of Christian

268

churches, indeed, more, of the Christian church oecumenical.
With their effort to keep the Christian movement within the
Jewish church, including proselytes from other religions, the
judaisers naturally associated the contention that the apostolate
was limited to those who were appointed by Jesus or by those
whom he appointed. With their denial of the distinctive doctrines
of Paul they associated a denial of his right to teach them as an
apostle. This denial seems to have taken the form of represent-
ing Paul as a renegade follower Of the Twelve, a man who knew
nothing of Christianity except what he had learned from the
Twelve, and preached this in a perverted form. This appears
from the nature of Paul's defence of his independent authority
as an apostle in the first two chapters of the letter, and indicate
that with their theory of a limited apostolate the judaisers had
associated the claim that the apostolic commission must proceed
from the circle of the original Twelve. . . .

This double attack Of the judaisers upon the apostle and
his doctrine and the attempt to convert the Galatians to their view
was upon the point of succeeding when Paul learned Of the state of
affairs. 1

Because of the twofold nature of the attack upon the believers in
Galatia, it seems apparent that Paul had a double purpose in his dis-
course to them. He was forced to defend himself as well as his doctrine.
In fact, it would be impossible adequately to defend the latter without
doing the former. He must support his claim to an equality with the
Twelve. Secondly he evidently decided to answer the Judaizers by
demonstrating the true nature of the Christian faith, showing it to be
the heir of Judaism, but transcendent and now independent of it.
Judging from the content of the discourse, Paul hOped to reaffirm what
is to him the heart of the gospel, justification by faith. "For in Jesus
Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision;
but faith which worketh by love. " 5:6 The rite of circumcision Paul
does not consider evil in itself. It is because his opponents would make

Of outward Observances the heart Of the gOSpel, rather than faith in

 

lBurton; pp. liv-lv.

269

Christ, that the Apostle is stirred to his depths. Christ to him is
ever the primary emphasis and must take second place to no other

phas e of doctrine .

Analysis of the Development of Ideas, with
Emphasis Upon Logos

 

 

Rhetorical adaptation can be dealt with usefully only at the
level of ideas, and not at the level of techniques abstracted
from their ideational context. If the rhetorical critic were to
analyze, report, and interpret ideas, using rhetorical forms
as-instrurnents, then valuable historical understandings might
be contributed. j —

 

 

 

 

Human values can be talked about only as constellations
of attitudes moving through qualitative changes in historical
continuity. The effort to comprehend this "history of ideas"
is at the center of speech criticism, for rhetorical adaptation
can be understood only on the basis of an adequate historical
perspective on these germinal values.

 

 

. . . rhetorical evaluation will attempt to discover the follow-
ing things: (1) the basic values on which the Speaker rests his
Specific prOposals; (2) the specific proposals themselves;

(3) the manner in which the Speaker attempts to connect values
with proposals in the minds of his audience; (4) the extent to
which these connections were appropriate to the audience being
addressed. These various "connections" are not simply
"logical appeals"; the connections will be established . . . by
virtue of all kinds of appeal in the Speech. 1 (Emphasis ours)

As will be pointed out under the heading "Arrangement" this
letter has three easily discernible divisions. The first two chapters
are personal in content, the next two are doctrinal, and the last two

consist of practical application Of the foregoing.

 

1Albert J. Croft, "The Functions of RhetOrical Criticism, "
Quarterly Journal Of Speech Vol. XLII (Oct, 1956), pp. 287-289.

 

270

The Key Ideas of This Address

 

Running through all three divisions is the keynote Of "liberty. "
This emphasis upon freedom is found in at least eleven places in
the discourse, "more Often than in all the other Epistles put together. "1
Let us consider some of the key references in the order of their
appearing.

Fourteen years later, I went up to Jerusalem again, this time
with Barnabas, and we took Titus with us. My visit on this
occasion was by divine command, and I gave a full exposition
of the GOSpel which I preach among the Gentiles. I did this
first in private conference with the Church leaders, to make
sure that what I had done and prOposed doing was acceptable to
them. Not one of them intimated that Titus, because he was a
Greek, ought to be circumcised. In fact, the suggestion would
never have arisen but for the presence of some pseudo-
Christians, who wormed their way into our meeting to spy on
the liberty we enjoy in Christ Jesus, and then attempted to tie
us up with rules and regulations. We did not give those men
an inch, for the truth of the GOSpel for you and all Gentiles
was at stake. Gal 2: 1-5 Phillips translation.

 

Thus in this first section of the discourse Paul strikes the chord
that he plans to make resound over and over again. He refers to his
attendance at what was probably the same council as is described in
Act 15 and to which previous reference has been made. On that
occasion Titus, a Gentile convert, had accompanied him. The Judaizing
element had brought pressure to bear that Titus might be circumcised,
but Paul refused to compromise his usual practice. Inasmuch as he
nowhere urged Gentile converts to subscribe to the Jewish law, it
would have been inconsistent indeed to have permitted Titus to be
circumcised. Furthermore, Paul reasons, none of the actual leaders
of the Church urged the matter. It is significant that the Apostle

describes the liberty of believers as a liberty "in Christ Jesus. "

 

1Farrar, Messages, p. 253.

271

It is the liberty of one who has become God's bond servant, and who is
free from the bondage of human prescriptions. Over forty times does
the name "Christ" appear in this epistle, and almost every occasion
shows it as minus the definite article, thus Signifying the personal

name rather than the title. Paul is declaring that because of what
Christ has done by His life and death, believers are now possessors of
spiritual freedom. This accords with the very first thought of the
epistle after the greeting. "Grace be to you and peace from God the
Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ, who gave himself for our sins,

that he might deliver us. . . . " 1:3, 4

 

The significance of the argument for the Galatians appears to be
that they should have seen themselves represented in Titus. If it was
not necessary for Titus to be circumcised even though he was an
itinerant preacher of the gosPel, then it could hardly be required of them
either. i

In the next chapter the same thought of liberty is expressed in
a different context.

Before the coming of faith we were all imprisoned under the
power of the Law, with our only hope of deliverance the faith
that was to be shown to us. Or, to change the metaphor, the
Law was like a strict governess in charge of us until we went to
the school of Christ and learned to be justified by faith in Him.
Once we had that faith we were completely free from the
governess's authority. For now that you have faith in Christ
you are all sons of God. All of you who were baptised "into"
Christ have put on the family likeness of Christ. Gone is the
distinction between Jew and Greek, slave and free man, male
and female--you are all one in Christ Jesus'.

Gal 3:23-28 Phillips

 

Paul, by‘the use of metaphor, first suggests that the Jewish

Torahl was like a prison-house confining believers to its custody until

 

1The expression "the Law" can easily be misunderstood by 20th
century readers. It is not a synonym for the Ten Commandment Law.
The original Hebrew and Greek words for this expression are Torah,

272

the advent of the gospel faith. The Greek word which Phillips trans-
lates "governess" is paidagOgon and literally it means the Slave
whose work it was to conduct a child to school. Paul is saying that
the office of Judaism was only to act as a prelude to the gospel. It
was merely to introduce men to Christ, and then its duties were dis-
charged. Once believers had been brought to Christ, they were no
longer under the direction of Judaism. Christ Himself, through the
Holy Spirit, became the Instructor. Once baptized into Christ the
Christian was on terms Of spiritual equality with every man, regardless
of race or standing. Thus would Paul shatter the barriers between
Jews and Gentiles. He believes all men are one in Christ, and urges
the Galatians to assert their privileges. The application Of these
figures, and the reasoning coincident with them is not difficult to see.
The Judaizing teachers had been affirming that the code committed to

the Jews with its manifold regulations was permanent in authority.

 

and 6nomos. "Torah" literally means "instruction" and thus to the
Jew, the whole of God's revealed will was originally the Torah. From
this early significance the term came to include the Jewish system
itself, as a system based on the revealed will of Jehovah. By Paul's
day a more comprehensive meaning still was prevalent among the
Jews. The Torah came to signify the entire mass of Rabbinical lore
surrounding the theme of religious duty. This included literally
hundreds of precepts nowhere found in the Old Testament. Regarding
the fourth commandment for example, we find that the Rabbis had
devised approximately six hundred independent precepts to implement
its observance. Thus what was primarily God's revealed will had be-
come by the time of Paul what he aptly describes as "a yoke of bond-
age. " Gal 5: 1

"The common reference of the term among the Jews was, of
course, to the legislative system ascribed to Moses. This was
par eminence 6nomos. On the basis of this system Pharisaism
had erected what at least tended to become a rigid external legal-
ism, according to which God demanded obedience to statutes, and
approved or disapproved men according as they rendered or failed
to render such obedience. Ethical principles and motives were in
large measure lost sight of. . . . " Burton, p. 447.

 

273

It was the building itself, not merely a scaffolding. Because of this,
Gentiles must submit themselves as certainly as the natural sons of
Abraham. But Paul rejects such concepts, and through easily com-
prehended illustrations he aimed to help the Galatians also to refuse
the claims of Jewish domination. The Jewish Prayer Book of the
day included the following thanksgiving: "Blessed art Thou, O Lord
our God, King of the Universe, who hast not made me a heathen.
Blessed art Thou . . . who hast not made me a bondman. Blessed
art Thou . . . who hast not made me a woman. "1 From such a spirit
of narrow and proud exclusiveness the Galatians are to rejoice in
their freedom.

This Spirit of Paul is echoed by Luther's famous commentary on
Galatians. Commenting on the above passage the Reformer exclaimed:

If therefore ye look unto Christ and that which he hath done,
there is now no law. For he, coming in the time appointed,
verily took away the law. NOw, since the law is gone, we are
not kept under the tyranny thereof any more; but we live in joy
and safety under Christ, who now so sweetly reigneth in us by
his Spirit. Now where the Lord (reigneth) there is liberty.
Wherefore, if we could perfectly apprehend Christ, which hath
abolished the law by his death and hath reconciled us unto his
Father, that schoolmaster should have no power over us at all.2

It is noticeable that this commentator so shares the thought of Paul as

to use the identical emphasis regarding liberty. Similarly those who

had been accustomed to the preaching of the Apostle such as the Galatians
would probably have been quick to catch the refrain that recurs in this
address.

The succeeding chapter continues the theme of liberty. Paul

 

lDuncan, p. 123.

2Martin Luther, A Commentary on St. Paul's Epistle to the
Galatians, Based on Lectures Delivered at the University of Wittenbeig
in the Year 1531 (London: James Clarke and Co.), pp. 336-337.

 

 

 

274

now illustrates the Christian's deliverance from the bondage of Jewish
ritual and legalism by use of an allegory.

It is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave and

the other by the free woman. The child of the slave was born

in the ordinary course of nature, but the child of the free woman
was born in accordance with God's promise. This can be regarded
as an allegory. Here are the two Agreements represented by the
two women: the one from Mount Sinai bearing children into
Slavery, typified by Hagar (Mount Sinai being in Arabia, the land
of the descendants of Ishmael, Hagar's son), and corresponding
to present-day Jerusalem--for the Jews are still, Spiritually
Speaking, "slaves. " But the free woman typifies the heavenly
Jerusalem, which is the mother of us all, and is Spiritually
"free. " It is written

Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not:

Break forth and cry, thou that travailest not:
For more are the children of the desolate
Than of her which hath the husband.

Now we, brothers, are like Isaac, for we are children born
"by promise. " But just as in those far-off days the natural son
persecuted the "Spiritual" son, so it is today. Yet what is the
scriptural instruction?

Cast out the handmad and her son:
For the son of the handmaid shall not inherit
With the son of the free woman.

So then, my brothers, we are not to look upon ourselves as

the sons of the slave woman but of the free, not sons of slavery

under the Law but sons of freedom under grace. 4:22-31
Phillips translation

As Westerners, we are inclined to regard with suspicion argument
from allegory. However, as pointed out elsewhere in this dissertation,
the Eastern mind was far more familiar with this mode of reasoning.

It should also be emphasized that Paul was not discounting the historicity
of the narrative to which herefers. He is affirming that the record has
a double sense. In this he is consistent with the concept. expressed
throughout the New Testament that Israel was a type of the Church.

The belief of Christians since the time of Christ in this regard has been

275

as expressed in the following quotation.

Jewish history and worship form one grand type. The Old
Testament (as Augustine long ago remarked) is the New veiled,
and the New Testament is the Old unveiled.

The ancient Jewish pe0p1e, for example, sustained to God
the same relation as is now sustained by the Christian Church,
and by each Christian. Their sufferings in Egypt, their de-
liverance under Moses, their wanderings in the desert, their
entry into Canaan, prefigure important facts in the history of
all Christians. The Israelites not only lived under the same
authority with us, and were governed by an economy of dis-
cipline like our own, but the facts of their history were typical
of the history of the Church. Ro 2:28; 1 Cor 10; Heb 4; 1 Pet
2:5-10; Rev 15:51

Thus Paul takes a story found in the Scriptures possessed and esteemed
by the Galatians, and applies it to.their own situation.

The parallels he is drawing can be depicted as follows:

 

 

JEWISH CHURCH CHRISTIAN CHURCH
The bondwoman, Hagar. The freewoman, Sarah.
Son Of the bondwoman, Ishmael. Son Of the freewoman, Isaac.
Natural birth (the flesh). Supernatural birth (the promise).
Mount Sinai Mount Zion
The Law The Promise
The earthly Jerusalem The heavenly Jerusalem
Enslaved . Free
Fruitful Barren
Small offspring Large offspring
Persecuting Persecuted
Expulsion Inheritance
The Jewish Church is enslaved. The Christian Church is free. 2

In effect Paul is declaring that the existing Jewish Church was
in a similar position to God as Hagar and her son Ishrnael were to

Abraham. Hagar had been a slave and her son likewise. Ultimately both

 

1Joseph Angus, The Bible Handbook, Revised by Samuel G. Green,
(London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1952), pp. 226-227.

Zw. Sanday, Ellicott, Vol. VII, p. 453.

 

276

were expelled from the household of Abraham after IsMael had perse-
cuted Isaac, the son of Abraham's true wife Sarah. Even so, Paul is
saying, the present Jewish church, and the Judaizers who are endeavour-
ing to seduce you--these have a wrong relationship with God. They are
ever behaving like servants instead of as sons. They are striving by
works to earn commendation and acceptance, rather than accepting the
free love due from a father to his child. Furthermore, as Ishmael had
persecuted Isaac, so do the Jews persecute the Christians, and the
Judaizing teachers Paul.

True Christians are represented by Isaac. He was the child of
promise miraculously born, unlike Ishrnael who was born as a result
of Abraham's own carnal effort to implement God's promise. Every
Christian is miraculously "born again" through divine agencies and all
human efforts cannot make a sinner a child of God.‘ AS Ishmael was the
product of carnall activity so the Jewish preoccupation with outward
rites and ceremonies was evidence of their carnal, unrenewed hearts.
The religion of the Judaizers is one of bondage, of slavery to constant
striving after acceptance via human effort. In contrast the Christian
religion as preached by Paul was one of freedom, whereby believers
are freely accepted by God, not because of their works, but because
of their relationship to Christ through faith. Such is the reasoning of
the Apostle. As Duncan has pointed out "every word in this argument
of Paul must have lashed his Judaizing opponents to indignation. "7-

At the same time it was calculated to convict the Galatains of the truth
of Paul's position, and the error of his opponents'.

We need only recall the eminent position granted by Jews and

Christians today to Abraham to realize the appropriateness of Paul's

 

lCarnal is Paul's term_ for the opposite of "spiritual. " It signifies
the activity Of the unregenerate person.

zDuncan, p. 145.

277

argument. The Galatians probably used concerning this Old Testament
patriarch the phrase current in their day--"The Father of the Faithful"
(Rom 4:16) . Any reference to Abraham was likely to enlist their
interest immediately. Furthermore the application made by Paul
concerning the sons Ishmael and Isaac, as representing the old and new
covenants respectively, could hardly fail to win the attention of the
Galatians. Regularly they were participating in the Communion service
which was symbolic of the "blood of the new covenant" Shed on Calvary
(Mt 26:28). The very high point of their faith was concerned with the
new covenant of promise to which they had once been strangers. ' (Eph.
2: 12, 13)

By his five-fold use of the word "free" in this passage Paul has
endeavoured to Show that true religion is the Spontaneous service of
"sons" rather than the enforcement of outward ritual and Observances
suchas even Slaves could fulfill. He has declared that the legal spirit
of a servant is alien to the true motive of Christianity which is love.

In the next section of his discourse he sums up the conclusions of the
preceding arguments, and is careful to delineate the nature of the
freedom to which the Galatians have been called.

For freedom Christ has set us free; stand fast therefore, and
do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. Now 1, Paul, say to
you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no ad-
vantage to you. I testify again to every man who receives
circumcision that he is bound to keep the whole law. You are
severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you
have fallen away from grace. For through the Spirit, by faith,
we wait for the hope of righteousness. For in Christ Jesus
neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but
faith working through love. You were running well; who
hindered you from obeying the truth? This persuasion is not
from him who called you. A little yeast leavens the whole lump.
I have confidence in the Lord that you will take no other view
than mine; and he who is troubling you will bear his judgment,
whoever he is. But if I, brethren, still preach circumcision,
why am I still persecuted? In that case the stumblingblock of

.91 if}. I1" 1|

 

 

278

the cross has been removed. I wish those who unsettle you would
mutilate themselves'. For you were called to freedom, brethren;
only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but
through love be servants of one another. For the whole law is
fulfilled in one word, "You shall love your neighbour as your-
self. " 5: 1-14 RSV

Paul's key thought of liberty occurs both at the commencement
and the end of this passage. His tone has become more stern and
authoritative. Believing that he has adequately defended his position,
the Apostle here emphasizes the natural consequences of his doctrine.
"Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall
profit you nothing." v 2. It is noteworthy that he has not Specifically
mentioned circumcision in the preceding two chapters. Instead he has
endeavoured to“ cut away the entire foundation upon which circumcision
and similar issues rested. Confident now that he has shown the temporary
nature of Judaism and its preparatory function, Paul feels free to urge
the implications of these facts. If Judaism was a temporary institution,
any reversion at this time to its elements would be a retrograde step,
he affirms. Circumcision is no longer "profitable" as regards righteous-
ness. Indeed, he says, you must choose between such ordinances of
obsolete Judaism, and Christ. Each is exclusive of the other. He who
has Christ does not now need the Torah of Israel to prescribe his daily
conduct. He who follows the Torah as his guide thereby places himself
outside of Christ. "For I testify again to every man that is circumcised,
that he is a debtor to do the whole law. " v 3 This is relentless logic.
If, says Paul, circumcision is so important as tO be made the symbol
and seal of Judaism, then its observance must imply that the observer
holds himself subjeCt to the ceremonial system in its entirety. If you
are going to obey a rite nowhere enunciated by Christ or His apostles
in the new Christian age, Paul tells his listeners, then just as logically

you ought to go the whole way and submit to every requirement of the

 

 

279

Jewish code. Probably this thought had strong impact upon the
Galatians, for it is not likely that they had considered all the irnpli-
cations of the Judaizing doctrine to which they had given ear. To ob-
serve the countless ceremonial washings, and the multitude of rabbinical
precepts regarding the minutia of life, which had been imposed by the
Jewish leaders upon the original Mosaic law would have proved a
"yoke Of bondage" indeed.

"For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by
faith. For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth anything,
nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love. " vs 5, 6 Twice

the word "faith" is used in contrast to the thought of ceremonial works

 

in the preceding verses. Paul is saying that the righteousness which

is the product of a man's own works is entirely human, whereas the
righteousness which results from the faith inspired by God and mediated
by the Spirit is alone acceptable to heaven.

Paul proclaims, in words that to the Galatians must have rung
out as a rallying-cry as they have done to succeeding genera-
tions, that when once a man is in Christ Jesus, his standing
before God . . . is not affected one whit by the question whether
he is circumcised or not . . . With the God and Father of our
Lord Jesus Christ, distinctions of this kind cease to carry any
weight at all, and the only thing that avails for salvation is faith
in Him--a faith which works through love, or, it may be, which
is set in motion by love. Emphafisis his]1

 

 

 

 

The theme of the entire epistle has been summed up in these last
two lines--"For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth anything,
nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love. " The first four
chapters have dealt with this proposition regarding circumcision
(which stands for all the outward Observances of Judaism), and the last

section, chapters five and Six, apply the second prOposition, namely

 

lDuncan, pp. 156 - 157 .

280

that true faith works through love. The first proposition is Paul's
summary of the character of contemporary Judaism, while the second

is his summary of the nature of Christianity. By the first he says--

The essence of Judaism is that external works avail to make a man
righteous. In contrast, the second statement asserts that the essence

of Christianity consists of an attitude of the heart, and the true Christian
is motivated, not by the legalistic outlook of the Jew, but by faith and
love.

The argument in verse eleven was probably much easier for the
local churches of the first century to understand than for readers Of
today. "And I, brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet
suffer persecution? than is the offence of the cross ceased. " Probably

what is meant is that there had been a time when Paul had permitted

 

Jewish converts to continue the rite as regards their offspring, rather
than give unnecessary offence to unbelieving Jews. Apparently some
of his critics in Galatia had used this in support of the claim that Paul

himself preached circumcision.

Paul's point would seem to be that his Opponents are not con-
sistent in their attacks on him. 'They began by persecuting me
for not demanding that Gentile converts should be circumcised.
Now they insinuate that at heart I recognize the necessity of
circumcision, and sometimes enforce it. They cannot have it
both ways. If they themselves believe that I do preach circum-
cision, why do they go on persecuting me for not preaching it?'l

Circumcision is taken as occupying, in the Judaising system,
the same place that the cross of Christ occupied in that of St.
Paul. The two things are alternatives. If one is taught there
is no need for the other.2

Lest his emphasis on liberty should be misunderstood and in-

terpreted as antinomianism or licentiousness, Paul guards his doctrine

 

lDuncan, p. 160.
2Sanday, Ellicott, Vol. VII, p. 457.

281

by adding: "For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only
use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one
another. For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this;
Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. " vs 13, 14

Highly significant is his use of the word "serve. " Prior to this
he has emphasized the bondage of Judaism as then practiced, and has
warned against service to such. Now he declares that while the
Christian is set at liberty from all the bondage of human requirements
there is a true service required Of the believer.

. . . here Paul is dealing rather with the general principle

that Christian freedom, so far from implying lack of restraint,

is the acceptance of a new but glad and willing servitude, accord-
ing to which, with love as a motive power in our hearts, we seek
not to please ourselves but to serve one another. . . . the impli-
cation is that, free as we are, we are not our own masters; our
life, like that of our Lord, must be a life spent in the service of
our brethren; for if the binding force of law is no longer operative,
there has entered into our lives the new constraining force of
Christian love. 1

This affirmation of Paul's is meant to protect him from misunder-
standing. Having strenuously Opposed one extreme of conduct, he
wisely forewarns his listeners not to swing to the other extreme.
Because they are free from the legal structure of the Jews with its
multitudinous requirements, they are not to think that they can now give
free rein to what Paul denominates "the flesh. " While no speaker can
safeguard himself from each and every'misconstruction placed on his
words, it is certainly the path of wisdom for him to buttress his main
premises in such a way that only the wealcrninded or the malicious could
misconstrue his basic positions.

The thought of true service to God and man is extended in the next

verses.

 

1Duncan, pp. 163- 164.

282

. . . if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law. Now

the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery,
fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft,
hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of
the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past,
that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of
God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffer-
ing, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance:

against such there is no law. vs 18-23

Paul here declares that the true Christian is led by the Holy Spirit.
He is not "under law, " that is, he is not motivated by a legalistic spirit.
(It Should be noted that in the original Greek there is no article before
the word "law. " To be "under law" in Paul's mind meant to be subject
to the constraint of legalism.)

Duncan has paraphrased the words of Paul as follows.

When you attain to a relation with God which is truly spiritual,
you pass into a sphere in which legalism in any shape or form
no longer holds sway. As has been argued in chaps. iii and iv. ,
law is for servants; but if we .know ourselves no longer servants,
but free-born sons, our relationship must express itself not in
legal Obedience but in Spiritual affinity. '

The list of the "works of the flesh" is given in order that the
Galatians might make a test of their own experience and discover whether
they are walking according "to the flesh" or "in the Spirit. " Luther says:
"And this doth Paul because there were many hypocrites amongst the
Galatians (as there are also at this day among us). 2

In contrast to the "works of the flesh, " Paul catalogues "the fruit
of the Spirit." This strengthens his contention regarding the true
nature of the Christian life. The list here given constitutes good evi-

dence of the quality of Paul's resources of Invention. The catalogue of

 

1Duncan, p. 169.

2Luther, Commentary on Galatians, p. 510.

283

Christian graces has nowhere its counterpart in all the realm of pagan
literature. In this reference to "love, joy, peace, longsuffering,
gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance" we have a com-
pendium of major Pauline values. As will be pointed out in the con-
clusion, these values have done much towards shaping the ethics and
institutions of the Western world.

The contrasting lists found in this setting have yet another Sig-
nificance. It is typical of Paul's overflowing and comprehensive
thought that an expression be made to serve more than one purpose.

In these verses he not only sharply distinguishes between the genuine
worshipper and the hypocrite, but he infers that the religion of the
Judaizing teachers might inculcate a formal ceremonial holiness bereft
of the "fruit of the Spirit" and manifesting instead "the works of the
flesh." It is as though he declared: "My dear Galatians, you may
practice circumcision and a thousand other ceremonial Observances,
but if these serve only to excuse "the works of the flesh" in your lives,
then your exPerience is a Sham. "

The warning against misunderstanding his emphasis on Christian
freedom reaches its climax in the next chapter where the Apostle
declares:

Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man sow-
eth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall
of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall
of the Spirit reap life everlasting. And let us not be weary in

well doing: for in due time we shall reap, if we faint not. As we
have therefore Opportunity, let us do good unto all men, eSpecially
unto them who are of the household of faith. 6:7-10

Had this passage occurred in the first chapter instead of the last,
we would have felt that the Apostle was lacking in powers of logical
arrangement. These verses place much emphasis upon "doing, " while

hitherto he has been warning the Galatains against believing that their

284

religious works can earn Salvation. Only when perceived as an anti—

dote to any perversion of his former emphasis, do these later statements
seem appr0priate.

We have traced the leading idea of the epistle--the Christian's
freedom from the motives and requirements of contemporary Judaism.

There is a complementary theme running throughout the letter,
and particularly dilated upon in the central chapters, which also should
be considered. This complementary theme has reference to the purpose
and place of the dispensation of the law which was ushered in at Sinai.
The word "law" occurs over thirty times in this discourSe, and more
than half of these references are in the central two chapters. In the
discussion Of this theme we find exemplified Paul's use of logic. The
only Pauline parallel to the concise, incisive argumentation of chapters
three and four is to be found in the book of Romans, which seems to
have been prepared almost as a lawyer's brief. The main paragraphs
of Paul's with reference to this theme of the purpose of the law are

here reproduced from Galatians.

. . . The scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles
by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying,

"In thee shall all the nations be blessed. " So then, those who are
men of faith are blessed with Abraham who had faith.

For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for
it is written, "Cursed be every one who does not abide by all
things written in the book Of the law, and do them. " Now it is
evident that no man is justified before God by the law; for "He who
through faith is righteous shall live"; but the law does not rest on
faith, for "He who does them Shall live by them. " Christ redeemed
us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us--for
it is written, "Cursed be every one who hangs on a tree"--that in
Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles,
that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

To give a human example, brethren: no one annuls even a
man's will, oradds to it, once it has been ratified. Now the
promises were made to Abraham and to his offSpring. .It does not
say, "And to offSprings, " referring to many; but, referring to one,

285

"And to your offSpring, " which is Christ. This is what I mean:
the law, which came four hundred and thirty years afterward,
does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to
make the promise void. For if the inheritance is by the law, it
is no longer by promise; but God gave it to Abraham by a
promise. .

Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions,
till the offSpring Should come to whom the promise had been
made; and it was ordained by angels through an intermediary.
Now an intermediary implies more than one; but God is one.

Is the law then against the promises of God? Certainly
not, for if a law had been given which could make alive, then
righteousness would indeed be by the law. But the scripture
consigned all things to sin, that what was promised to faith in
Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.

Now before faith came, we were confined under the law,
kept under restraint until faith should be revealed. So that the
law was our custodian until Christ came, that we might be justi-
fied by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer
under a custodian; for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God,
through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ
have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is
neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's Offspring, heirs
according to promise. Galatians 3:8-29. RSV

In this discussion of the law Paul apparently has in mind the many
questions in the minds of the confused Galatians. It is as though he had
heard them ask such questions as: "Why did God give the law if men
cannot be justified by observance of it? " "What can be the relationship
between Paul's emphasis on justification by faith, and the rules and
regulations of the Old Testament Scriptures?" "Wherein do Paul and
our new teachers differ as regards the significance of the covenant

entered into by Israel at Mt. Sinai? "1

 

lMost orators have recognized the necessity for answering in their
Speeches the unvoiced objections of their hearers. One public Speaker
of recent times has expressed this in the following quotation. He is not
referred to as one embodying the highest rhetorical ideals, but because
of his insight in this particular matter.

"It was important to see clearly in advance of each Single Speech

the probable contents and the form of the objections that might be

286

Paul's first point is that the gospel of faith preceded the giving
Of the law by several centuries. "The Scripture, foreseeing that God
would justify the Gentiles 'by faith, ' really proclaimed the GOSpel
centuries ago in the words, 'In three shall all nations be blessed. "'
The Apostle is quoting from Gen 13:3 where is recorded the prediction
that even the Gentiles were to Share the blessings of Abraham. This
event took place long years before the forming of the covenant between
God and national Israel. Thus it is evident, suggests Paul, that to
save the Gentiles through faith rather than through law must have been
God's primary purpose. This argument is linked to the preceding
reminder that Abraham himself had been accounted righteous as a
result of his faith in God. "You can go right back to Abraham to see
the principle of faith in God. He, we are told, "believed God and it
was counted unto him for righteousness." Can you not see, then, that
all those who 'believe God' are the real sons of Abraham' ?" 3:6, 7
Phillips. Thus the Apostle draws on references from the first book Of
the Old Testament Scriptures to prove his position that faith rather
than law is primary to the gOSpel. I

The next argument is that seeking salvation by the pathway of
legalism leads to a curse rather than a blessing. "Everyone, however,
who is involved in trying to keep the Law's demands falls under a curse,

for it is written:

 

expected during the discussion and then completely to pick them

to pieces in one's own Speech. Thereby it was advisable to men-
tion at once the possible objections and to prove their untenability;
thus a listener who had come, although stuffed with the Objections
he had been taught, but otherwise with an honest heart, was won
more easily by the refutation of the doubts that had been impressed
into his memory. The material he had been taught was auto-
matically refuted and his attention was attracted more and more
by the Speech. Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf (New York: Reynal and
Hitchcock, 1939), p. 701.

 

287

Cursed in everyone which continueth not
In all things which are written in the book Of the Law,
To do them. 3: 10 Phillips

Because no human being can perfectly observe with heart, mind, and
body every requirement of God, whoever truststo his works to save
him will thereby earn only a curse. The best of men fall short by sins
of omission as well as sins of commission, and therefore the Galatians
are forgetting first principles, and heading for failure if they strive

to earn God's favour by their own works of self-righteousness. Such is
Paul's argument. It is clearly set forth in another letter that he wrote
about this time, and which will be quoted here as summarising in con-
tent what was probably the substance of the first preaching of the
Apostle's in Galatia.

Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to
them who are under the law: that every mouth may be st0pped,
and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by
the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his
sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. But now the
righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being wit-
nessed by the law and the pr0phets; even the righteousness of
God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them
that believe: for there is no difference: for all have sinned,
and come short of the glory of God; being justified freely by his
grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: whom God
hath set forth to be a prOpitiation through faith in his blood, to
declare his righteousness for the remission of Sins that are
past, through the forbearance of God; to declare, I say, at this
time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier
of him which believeth in Jesus. Where is boasting then?

It is excluded. By what law? of works ? Nay: but by the law of
faith. Rom 3: 19~27

Thus far Paul has argued (1) that ages before the covenant made
with Israel on Sinai, God had promised righteousness to all who depended
upon Christ rather than upon their own works, and (2) because it is
impossible perfectly to Observe the comprehensive requirements of the
Law, whoever seeks righteousness through the Torah will instead

earn only the curse pronounced upon disobedience.

288

The next argument is that the Old Testament distinctly claims
that the motivating principles of action in the life of the righteous will
be faith, not legalism. ("It is made still plainer that no one is
justified in God's sight by obeying the Law, for:

The righteous shall live by 31131; Gal 3:11 Phillips
This time the quotation used by the Apostle comes from Habakkuk 2:4.
Paul defends himself constantly from the charge of innovation by point-
ing out that the principles he has taught are clearly expressed in the
Scriptures of the Old Testament an authority accepted by his hearers.1
As he proceeds to Show that the ruling principle of the Law is works
and not faith, again he refers to a passage from the Pentateuch to sup-
port his point. "And the Law is not a matter of faith at all but of doing,

as, for example, in the Scripture: He that doeth them Shall live in

 

them." Gal 3:12 Phillips.

If man could yield perfect obedience to the Law, then he would

be just and could live by the Law, instead of by faith. But can

he yield such an obedience? No. . . . And so man remains under
the curse of the Law, until saved by faith.2

Paul's next statement purposely lacks any connecting particle in

the original Greek. This seems to be done in order to emphasize the

 

1The wish of the Galatians to comply even with the ritual laws of
the Old Testament indicates the reverence they held for these writings.
Paul's arguments from the Scriptures indicates the same situation.

It Should be kept in mind that the record of Acts Shows that Paul's
method of evangelising the heathen was to effect a transition in belief
from the God of Nature to the God of Revelation. Paul usually began his
preaching by pointing to the evidence in the natural world for the exist-
ence of a Supreme Being. Next he showed that this Divine Being had
revealed Himself to human beings through the inSpired oracles entrusted
to the Jews. The third step was to point out that these Old Testament
writings foretold the coming of a Redeemer. Lastly, Paul declared that
the life of Jesus had fulfilled these Old Testament predictions. Thus
wherever a Gentile church was established by Paul, its members had
implicit confidence in the Old Testament Scriptures.

2‘Carl Aaron Swensson, "Annotations on the Epistle of St. Paul to the
Galatians, " The Lutheran Commentary, ed. Henry Eyster Jacobs, 12
vols. (New York: Christian Literature Co., 1895-1898), Vol. 8, p. 374.

 

289

greatness of the glad contrast announced.

Now Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the Law's condem-
nation, by Himself becoming a curse for us when He was crucified.
For the Scripture is plain: Cursed is every one that hangeth on a
tree. Gal 3:13 Phillips '

Having established to his own mind at least that the Sacred Scrip-
tures were clear regarding man's hOplessneSS without Christ, Paul
climaxes with his presentation Of Christ as the only answer to man's
dilemma. It is highly probable that his arguments would prove accept-
able to most of the Galatians for they were based upon the Old Testament
revelation which they already endorsed. l The culminating presentation
of Christ as the solution to man's problem regarding righteousness
would probably also be acceptable to the Galatians both on the basis of
the preceding argmnents, and also because of their original experience
with the gospel of Christ.

The substance of the enthymemes of Paul can be abridged as
follows to summarise the arguments of the preceding verses.

1. Faith is God's primary instrument of righteousness rather than
law, because ages before Sinai the Lord announced that Gentiles
would be saved through trust in Him.

2. If Abraham "the father of the faithful" was justified by faith,
then the true descendents of Abraham will be justified in the
same way.

3. Because the Old Testament pronounces a curse upon those who
fail 'to conform in entirety to the Law, it is evident that those
who seek justification via that path will only merit a curse,
inasmuch as it is impossible for an imperfect human being to
keep perfect law.

4. The Old Testament clearly asserts that the guiding principle

 

1See footnote page 288.

290

in the life of the justified is the principle of faith. Therefore
the purpose of the Law cannot be that Of justification.

5. The Old Testament also teaches that the basic principle under-
lying the Law is quite different to the principle of faith. The

former principle is related to doing but the latter to believing.

 

 

Because these are not identical it is obvious that the purpose
of the Law should never be equated with the purpose of faith.
6. While we by nature are under the curse or condemnation of
the law, through God's grace manifested in Christ, we may
receive forgiveness and righteousness.
Having set forth these enthymemes, Paul concludes with:

God's purpose is therefore plain: that the blessing promised to
Abraham might reach the Gentiles through Jesus Christ, and the
Spirit might become available to us all by faith.

Gal 3: 14 Phillips.

It is noteworthy that the Apostle admirably sums up in this sentence

the essence of each of his preceding arguments. By the reference to
"God's purpose" heinfers what he had stated in verse eight of this
chapter: "And the scripture, forseeing that God would justify, the heathen
through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee "
shall all nations be blessed. " The implication of the first two words of
Paul's conclusion in verse fourteen is that the gospel of faith which he,
Paul, is proclaiming is no new thing. It has been part of God's purpose
for long ages, as evidenced by the Scriptural account Of the promise to .
Abraham regarding the blessing of the Gentiles. The reference to Abraham
in this verse of summary refers back to the argument that Abraham was
justified by his faith in God, and that therefore his'true descendents will
be justified according to the same manner. When Paul says in this same
verse "through Jesus Christ, " he is affirming the substance of his final

argument before this conclusion and expressed in verse thirteen:

291

"Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a
curse for us . . .." The implication would be also that there was no
other way of receiving the blessing, deSpite the teachings of the
Judaizers. This he had stressed by his prior deductions from the
authoritative writings of the Old Testament. When we reach the words
"by faith" at the end of the summary it is not difficult to recognize
these words as the underlying maxim of the entire discussion. We would
venture to affirm that comparatively few Speakers have had such skill
at synthesising and summarising as this Christian orator.

Recognizing that abstract argument alone would probably not be
sufficient to make his point of view evident to the Galatians, the Apostle
proceeds to illustrate.

Let me give you an everyday illustration, my brother. Once a
contract has been prOperly drawn up and signed, it is honoured
by both parties, and can neither be disregarded nor modified by
a third party.

Now a Promise was made to Abraham and his seed. (Note
in passing that the Scripture says not "seeds" but uses the singu-
lar "seed, " meaning Christ.) I say then that the Law, which came
into existence four hundred and thirty years later, cannot render
null and void the original "contract" which God had made, and
thus rob the Promise Of its value. For if the receiving of the
promised blessing were now made to depend on the Law, that
would amount to a cancellation of the original "contra ct" which
God made with Abraham as a Promise. Gal 3: 15-18 Phillips

In this argument based on analogy Paul declares that after any
human contract has been signed it is thereupon binding and beyond legal
change. Similarly God's agreement with Abraham was valid from its
ratification at that time, and could not be altered by subsequent events
at Sinai. New terms, Paul is saying, would require a new contract
altogether, and therefore it cannot be believed that the giving of the

Mosaic law changed the earlier agreement made with Abraham.

292

The reason why the Apostle introduces this point is that the
Law might be supposed to restrict the bearings of the promise.
It might be thought to add certain new and limiting conditions,
without compliance with which the blessings of the promise
could not be obtained. This was the position of the Judaising
party, against which St. Paul was arguing. 1

While the cogency of Paul's analogy seems apparent there also Seems
to be a danger in the direction of the Apostle's argument. Some of the
Galatians might say at this juncture: "Well, if Paul is Speaking what is
right on this matter, what was the purpose of the Law? Why did God give
to Israel her Special code if its requirements have nothing to do with our
obtaining salvation?" AS with many other capable speakers Paul decided
to answer these queries before they were voiced.

Where then lies the point of the Law? It was an addition made
to underline the existence and extent of Sin until the arrival of
the "Seed" to Whom the Promise referred. Gal 3: 19 Phillips.

In his illustration of the human contract, Paul, in what seems
typical rabbinical fashion, had parenthetically supported his case by the
Old Testament's use of the singular noun "seed" rather than the plural.
This "seed" has particular reference to Christ, according to Paul.2
The Messiah is the true "seed" of the Father of the Faithful, and therefore
God's promise finds its Special application in the Person of Christ. Thus
in the verse just quoted it is suggested that the purpose of the Jewish law
was to make evident the need of a Redeemer. By its clear delineation
of sin, by its stress on the ceremonial washings etc. that implied con-
tamination with evil, the law would emphasize humanity's plight, and
thus underline the necessity of a Saviour. Paul's main point here would
appear cogent to many modern minds, but his play upon the use of the

singular noun rather than the plural is not as congenial to contemporary

 

'Sanday, Ellicott, p. 445.-
2See Gal 3:15-18.

293

thinkers. It smacks Of the cabbalistic interpretations Of mystics.

How shall we judge this parenthetic argument based on the use of "seed"
instead of "seeds"? Certainly no worthy Speech critic would wish to
see this device aligned against present practice, inasmuch as "time and
place factors" admittedly influence methods Of persuasion. The follow-
ing quotation places this reference in its true framework of Christian
thought in the first century.

The argument of the Apostle turns upon the use, both in
the Hebrew and in'the LXX. , of a singular instead Of a plural
noun. Both in the Hebrew and in the LXX. , however, the noun,
though singular, is collective. It meant, in the first instance at
leaSt, not any one individual, but the posterity of Abraham as a
whole. The Apostle refers it to Christ and the "Spiritual Israel"
(1. e. , the Church, of which He is the Head), on the same principle
on which, throughout the New Testament, the history of the chosen
peOple under the Old covenant is taken as a type of the Christian
diSpensation. We may compare Matt. ii. 15, where an allusion
to the exodus of Israel from Egypt is treated as a type Of the
return of the Holy Family from their flight into Egypt. Such
passages are not to be regarded as arguments possessing a
permanent logical validity (which would be to apply the rigid
canons of Western logic to a case for which they are unsuitable),
but rather as marked illustrations of the organic unity which the
apostolic writers recognised in the pre-Christian and Christian
dispensations. Not only had both the same Author, and formed
part of the same scheme, but they were actually the counterparts
one of the other. The events which characterised the earlier
diSpensation had their analogies--sometimes spiritual, some-
times literal--in the later. 1

 

Paul proceeds to contrast the proclamation of the Law on Sinai
with the giving of the promise to Abraham.

The Law was inaugurated in the presence of angels and by the
hand of a human intermediary. The very fact that there was an
intermediary is enough to Show that this was not the fulfilling of
the Promise. For the Promise of God needs neither angelic wit-
ness nor human intermediary but depends on Him alone.

Gal 3: 19-20 Phillips.

 

lSanday, Ellicott, pp. 445-446.

294

It is alluded to here that Israel received the Law through the minis-
tration Of Moses, whom God chose as a mediator. The necessity for
an intermediary implies the existence of two parties to a contract.
The Law, says Paul, was such a contract with conditions attached.
But the Promise required no intermediary, and its fulfillment does not
depend upon human prowess but upon the ability and grace of God.
Therefore the Promise stands superior to the Law.

The Apostle is not content to leave the matter there. It is too
vital to the whole Galatian controversy to be dismissed without full
consideration. He decides to underline what he had stated in the first
half of verse nineteen, regarding the purpose of the Mosaic code.

Is the Law then to be looked upon as a contradiction of the
Promise? Certainly not, for if there could have been a law
which gave men Spiritual life then that law would have produced
righteousness (which would have been, of course, in full harmony
with thepurpose of the Promise). But, as things are, the
Scripture has all men "imprisoned, " because they are found
guilty by the Law, that to men in such condition the Promise
might come to release all who believe in Jesus Christ.

Gal 3:21, 22 Phillips.

Thus it is stated that the objective of the Law is to lead men to
desire the fulfillment of the Promise. The Law, because of man's moral
weakness, can never justify. It is powerless to give Spiritual life.

On the other hand, Paul contends that the Law "imprisons" men, con-
demns them as transgressors with the result that they are led to find

deliverance in Christ through simple faith. A parallel passage to the
above is found in a contemporary epistle probably- written by Paul from

the same city the same year. This passage clarifies his argument still

further .

No condemnation now hangs over the head of those who are "in"
Jesus Christ. For the new spiritual principle of life "in" Christ
lifts me out of the Old vicious circle of Sin and death.

The Law never succeeded in producing righteousness--the
failure was always the weakness of human nature. But God has

295

met this by sending His own Son Jesus Christ to live in that
human nature which causes the trouble. And, while Christ was
actually taking upon Himself the sins of men, God condemned
that sinful nature. So that we are able to meet the Law's re-
quirements, so long as we are living no longer by the dictates
of our Sinful nature, but in obedience to the promptings of the
Spirit. Rom 8:1-4 Phillips. (emphasis his)

 

 

 

There can be no reasonable doubt that Paul had explained these
teachings to the Galatians when he first presented the gOSpel to them.
His statements in this letter do not fall upon their ears as something
new. Rather, they are reaffirmations. It is even possible that this
covering of the same ground would have the effect of arousing in the
Galatian converts happy memories of the occasions when they had first
heard the gosPel of grace from Paul. Perhaps the Apostle's recog-
nition of this possibility may have led him to link his argument on the
Law with the present standing and privileges of these believers. It is
at this juncture that the thought of freedom is re-introduced, and this
key-note recurs constantly in the next two chapters as the Apostle
reaches the climax Of his appeal.

. . . the Law was like a strict governess in charge of us

until we went to the school of Christ and learned to be justified
by faith in Him. Once we had that faith we were completely
free from the governess's authority. . . . Gone is the dis-
tinction between Jew and Greek, slave and free man, male and
female--you are all one in Christ Jesus. Gal 3:24-28 Phillips

You, my brother, are not a servant any longer; you are a son.
And, if you are a son, then you are certainly an heir of God
through Christ. 4:7 Phillips.

Thus does the logic of this discourse merge into pathos. That the
conviction resulting from argument should be intensified by the emotions
coincident with newly found freedom would seem to have been Paul's
conscious or unconscious intention in this new emphasis. Reference will

be made again to this transition in the section on Pathos.

296

The third major theme in the epistle to the Galatians is that of
Paul's Apostolic authority. 1 This had been challenged by the Judaizers,

and it is significant that Paul defends hilnself on this score before he

 

proceeds to enunciate his main themes regarding law, and liberty. He

is well aware that men do not give ready ear to the counsel of one who

has been discredited. Certainly, the Judaizers could not have succeeded
in their endeavors to oust the missionary to the Gentiles from the
affections Of his converts. He could not have addressed them as he' does
in this letter had such been the case. As a spiritual father. he addresses
the "sons" who have been tempted to deny his authority. The first ‘
section of the discourse, the Opening two chapters, constitute the Apostle's
attempt at self-vindication. It follows:

1, Paul, who am appointed and commissioned as Special Messenger
not by man but by Jesus Christ and God the Father (Who raised Him
from the dead), I and all the brothers with me send the churches in
Galatia greeting. Grace and peace to you from God the Father and
from our Lord Jesus Christ, Who according to the Father's Plan
gave Himself for our Sins and thereby rescued us from the present
evil world-order. To Him be glory for ever and ever'.

I am amazed that you have so quickly transferred your
allegiance from Him Who called you in the grace of Christ to
another "gospel"! Not, of course, that it is or ever could be
another gOSpel, but there are Obviously men who are upsetting
your faith with a travesty of the GOSPel of Christ. Yet I say that
if I, or an angel from heaven, were to preach to you any other
gospel than the one you have heard, may he be damned'. You have
heard me say it before and now I put it down in black and white--
may anybody who preaches any other gOSpel than the one you have
already heard be a damned soul'. (Does that make you think now
that I am serving man's interests or God's? If I were trying to
win human approval I should never be Christ's servant.)

The GOSPel I preach to you is no human invention. No man
gave it to me, no man taught it to me; it, came to me as a direct
revelation from Jesus Christ.

 

1It is recognized that this theme has direct bearing on ethos, and it
is therefore also discussed under that heading.

297

For you have heard of my past career in the Jewish religion,

how I persecuted the Church of God with fanatical zeal and, in
fact, did my best to destroy it. I was ahead of most of my
contemporaries in the Jewish religion, and had a greater en-
thusiasm for the old traditions. But when the time came for God
(Who was responsible both for my physical birth and for my being
called by His grace), to reveal His Son within me so that I might
proclaim Him to the non-Jewish world, I did not, as might have
been expected, talk over the matter with any human being. I did
not even go to Jerusalem to meet those who were Special Messen-
gers before me--no, I went away to Arabia and later came back
to Damascus. It was not until three years later that I went up to
Jerusalem to see Peter, and I only stayed with him just over a
fortnight. I did not meet any of the other Special Messengers,
except James, the Lord's brother.

All this that I am telling you is, I assure you before God,
the plain truth. Later, I visited districts in Syria and Cilicia,
but I was still personally unknown to the churches of Judaea.
All they knew of me, in fact, was the saying: "The man who used
to persecute us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy. "
And they thanked God for what had happened to me.

Fourteen years later, I went up to Jerusalem again, this
time with Barnabas, and we took Titus with us. My visit on this
occasion was by divine command, and I gave a full exposition of
the GOSpel which I preach among the Gentiles. I did this first in
private conference with the Church leaders, to make sure that what
I had done and proposed doing was acceptable to them. Not one of
them intimated that Titus, because he was a Greek, ought to be
circumcised. In fact, the suggestion would never have risen but
for the presence of some pseudo-Christians, who wormed their
way into our meeting to Spy on the liberty we enjoy in Jesus Christ,
and then attempted to tie us up with rules and regulations. We did
not give those men an inch, for the truth of the GOSpel for you and
all Gentiles was at stake. And as far-as the leaders of the con-

ference were concerned (I neither know nor care what their exact
position was: God is not impressed with a man's Office), they had
nothing to add to my gOSpel. In fact they recognised that the
gOSpel for the uncircumcised was as much my commission as that
the gosPel for the circumcised was Peter's. For the God who had
done such great work in Peter's ministry for’the Jews was plainly
doing the same in my ministry for the Gentiles. When, therefore,
James, Cephas and John (who were the recognised "pillars" of

298

the Church there) saw how God had given me His grace, they
held out to Barnabas and me the right hand of fellowship, in
full agreement that our mission was to the Gentiles and theirs
to the Jews. The only suggestion they made was that we should
not forget the poor--and with this I was, of course, only too
ready to agree. 1

Later, however, when Peter came to Antioch I had to
Oppose him publicly, for he was then plainly in the wrong. It
happened like this. Until the arrival of some of James's com-
panions, he, Peter was in the habit of eating his meals with the
Gentiles. After they came, however, he withdrew and ate
separately from the Gentiles--out of sheer fear of what the Jews
might think. The other Jewish Christians carried out a similar
piece of deception, and the force of their bad example was so
great that even Barnabas was affected by it. But when I saw
that this behaviour was a contradiction of the truth of the GOSpel,
I said to Peter so that everyone could hear, "If you, who are a
Jew, do not live like a Jew but like a Gentile, why on earth do you
try to make Gentiles live like Jews ? " And then I went on to
explain that we, who are Jews by birth and not. Gentile sinners,
know that a man is justified not by performing what the Law
commands but by faith in Jesus Christ. Gal 1-2: 16 Phillips

In the first breath of his message Paul asserts that he is a divinely
chosen Apostle. "Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but
by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead; . . . "
This is followed by reference to the other problem agitating the minds
of the Galatians, namely whether the "new" gOSpel from the Judaizers
is to be accepted, verses six to ten. Then the claim of the Opening
sentence is reinforced.

But I certify you, brethren, that the gosPel which was preached
of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man,

neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
vs 11, 12

Thus Paul at the introduction of his discourse ties together the
two issues regarding his authority and his gospel. The reference in
between to the teachings Of his opponents indicates that these are to be
judged according to the truth or falsity of Paul's own claims which

prec ede and follow.

299

_ Thus the theme of the first two chapters has been announced by
the missionary to the Gentiles. He has submitted the prOposition that
his authority and his message are God-given. In the remainder of
these introductory chapters evidence is drawn from six periods of his
life to prove the prOposition he has offered.

a. Evidence drawn from his life before his conversion 1:13, 14.

b. Evidence drawn from the circumstances of his conversion and
his conduct immediately thereafter 1: 15- 17.

c. Evidence drawn from a visit to Jerusalem three years after
his conversion 1:18-20.

d. Evidence drawn from the period of his stay in Syria and
Cilicia 1:21-24.

e. Evidence drawn from his conduct on a visit to Jerusalem
fourteen years after the preceding one 2: l-10.

f. Evidence drawn from his conduct in resisting Peter at
Antioch 2:11-14. 1

a , Evidence drawn from his life before his conversion 1:13, 14.

For you have heard of my past career in the Jewish religion,

how I persecuted the Church of God with fanatical zeal and, in
fact, did my best to destroy it. I was ahead of most Of my con-
temporaries in the Jewish religion, and had a greater enthusiasm
for the old traditions. Phillips.

The argument is that anybody with the education and antecedents that

Paul had had would be the most unlikely person. to become a Christian.

It is inferred that only Divine intervention could accomplish a miracle

of this kind. That there is some weight in this argument is indicated

not only by the stress that Christian apologists have made of it but also by
the fact that some famous sceptics such as Lord Lyttelton have changed

their attitude to Christianity after studying this famous volte face.

 

 

b. Evidence drawn from the circumstances of his conversion and his
conduct immediately thereafter 1: 15-17.

But when the time came for God (Who was reSponsible for my
physical birth and for my being called by His grace), to reveal
His Son within me so that I might proclaim Him to the non-Jewish
world, I did not, as might have been expected, talk over the

 

lBurton, p. lxxii.

300

matter with any human being. I did not even go to Jerusalem

to meet those who were Special Messengers before me--no,

I went away to Arabia and later came back to Damascus.
Phillips.

By these words Paul is asserting that his conversion and mission
had been decreed by God long before his birth. It had been "pre-
destinated. " This being the case, divine interposition had accomplished
his submission to the teaching he had formerly considered as heresy.

. . . the apostle denies not only that he sought instruction from
the Twelve in particular, but that he put himself in communi-
cation with men at all, excluding not only the receiving of
instruction, but the imparting of it. The only natural, almost the
only possible, implication is that he sought communion with God,
a thought sufficiently indicated on the one side by the antithesis
of "fle sh and blood" and on the other by the mention of the rela-
tively desert land to which he went. 1

c. Evidence drawn from a visit to Jerusalem three years after his

conversion 1: 18-20.

It was not until three years later that I went up to Jerusalem to
see Peter, and I only stayed with him just over a fortnight.
I did not meet any of the other Special Messengers, except James,

the Lord's brother.
All this that I am telling you is, I assure you before God,

the plain truth. Phillips. '

This is another argument for Paul's independent apostleship.
When ultimately he had visited Jerusalem, the headquarters of the
infant church, he had not even then consulted the elder Apostles. True,
he admits seeing Peter and James, but it was for so short a period
during this time of preaching that he could hardly have received from

them an outline of Christian theology.

(1. Evidence drawn from the period of his stay in Syria and Cilicia.

1:21-24.

 

'1bid., p. 55.

301

Later, I visited districts in Syria and Cilicia, but I was still
personally unknown to the churches of Judaea. All they knew

Of me, in fact, was the saying: "The man who used to persecute
us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy. " And
they thanked God for what had happened to me. Phillips.

In other words, the preaching tour described was in regions out-
side the area dominated by the elder Apostles. This is evidence that
he was not under the direction of the Twelve, but rather he was engaged
in independent work. Paul had not preached in the churches of Judaea.
Furthermore this historical record indicates that the Christian com-
munities which existed amidst the sacred scenes of the Lord' life had
shown great joy at the reports of his ministry. It was apparent that
those in the best position to judge concerning the reality of his pro-

fession had manifested no Opposition. So Paul argues.

e. Evidence drawn from his conduct on a visit to Jerusalem fourteen
years after the preceding one 2:1-10.

Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with
Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. I went up by revelation;
and I laid before them (but privately before those who were of
repute) the gOSpel which I preach among the Gentiles, lest some-
how I should be running or hadrun in vain. But even Titus, who
was with me, was not compelled to be circumcised, though he

was a Greek. But because of false brethren secretly brought in

to Spy out our freedom which we have in Christ Jesus, that they
might bring us into bondage--to them we did not yield submission
even for a moment, that the truth of the gOSpel might be preserved
for you. And from those who were reputed to be something (what
they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality)--
those, I say, who were of repute added nothing to me; but on

the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the
gOSpel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted
with the gosPel to the circumcised (for he who worked through
Peter for the mission to the circumcised worked through me also
for the Gentiles), and when they perceived the grace that was given
to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars,
gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we
should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised; only they
would have us remember the poor, which very thing I was eager

to do. RSV

302

Thus Paul describes the second occasion on which he was able
to make contact with the leaders of the Church. He declares that on
this occasion he mixed freely with the believers in corporate groups,
and with the leaders in private conference. Despite this, there had
been no resultant Opposition from church leaders to his teachings or
his practice. Indeed, Paul reminiscences, some Judaizers endeavored
to influence the Twelve to order the circumcision of his Gentile associ-
ate Titus, but this endeavour was significantly unsuccessful, indicating
that the Twelve fully countenanced Paul's manner of working, and
recognized in him an instrument of God. Furthermore the Church
leaders had acknowledged that Paul's ministry was to be among the
non-Jewish peoples, and the only suggestion they had Offered was that
he should remember the needs of the poverty-stricken Jewish Christians.

Thoughts and arguments crowd in upon the Apostle with great
vehemence. His amanuensis cannot take them down fast
enough. Sentences are begun and not rightly ended, and much
of the sense is left to be supplied by conjecture. The general
drift of the passage is sufficiently plain, but there is much un-
certainty about the details. l

The original Greek of this passage indicates that Paul's thoughts
at this juncture had come tumultuously upon him. The style evidences
sincerity and negates duplicity, strengthening by ethical considerations
the logical positions set forth. Those who plan to deceive are far

more careful in expression than is the case with Paul when he is vehement.

f. Evidence drawn from his conduct in resisting Peter at Antioch 2:11-14.

Later, however, when Peter came to Antioch I had to oppose
him publicly, for he was then plainly in the wrong. It happened
like this. Until the arrival of some of James's companions, he,
Peter, was in the habit of eating his meals with the Gentiles.
After they came, however, he withdrew and ate separately from
the Gentiles--out of sheer fear of what the Jews might think.
The other Jewish Christians carried out a similar piece of

lSanday, p. 43 3 .

303

deception, and the force of their bad example was so great
that even Barnabas was affected by it. But when I saw that
this behaviour was a contradiction of the truth of the GOSPel,
I said to Peter so that everyone could hear, "If you, who are
a Jew, do not live like a Jew but like a Gentile, why on earth
do you try to make Gentiles live like Jews ? " Phillips

Apparently Peter had visited Antioch and at first mixed freely
with the Gentile believers. Upon the arrival of some representatives
from Jei'usalem who though Christian were still nationally minded,
Peter proved guilty of inconsistency. Through fear of criticism from
his stricter brethren he had gradually withdrawn himself from the
company of the Gentile believers, and simultaneously influenced others
such as Barnabas to follow his example. At such a time Paul had not
hesitated to openly rebuke the vacillating Apostle. This recital by
Paul is a fitting climax to his evidences of independent apostleship,
for it reveals him as one who is not subject to any human authority as
regards creed. From here, the argument imperceptibly almost in
transition, merges into a discussion of the significance of the Jewish
Law concerning which he had diSputed with Peter.

Thus we conclude the review of Paul's primary ideas and argu-
ments as found in the epistle to the Galatians. While bathed in
emotion, logical considerations are made foremost throughout. This
is the most polemical of all recorded addresses of the Apostle. In
this instance there seems abundant evidence that the criteria for
measuring logical capacity find adequate conformity in the reasoning
processes outlined. The Apostle very clearly discerned "the problem
disturbing the em (£13: and he thoroughly analysed "the nature and
bearing of the problem upon the social setting." Furthermore he
revealed impressive "fertility of mind in suggesting ideas relevant to
the solution of difficulty" as well as "acuteness in examining, thrOugh

reasoning, the implications of his suggestions. "1 Paul had readily

 

1Thonssen and Baird, p. 336.

304

perceived that his own authority and the truthfulness Of his teaching
were under suSpicion at Galatia, and that confirmation Of these must
be brought about by a review of the implications of his career, and
by a closely reasoned explanation Of the relationship between the
Jewish law and the Christian gospel.

One criticism that could be offered concerning the logical content
of this discourse is that for a speech some would view as ephemeral in
nature it contained too many ideas. It is doubtful whether the average
audience could graSp and retain the whole gamut of Paul's argument.
The succession of enthymemes concerning the law in the heart of the
letter requires some thinking through to perceive their full import, and
it is questionable whether the average listener today would be capable
of doing this. In answer to such a criticism, however, it should be
pointed out that the Galatians were much more familiar with the theo-
logical implications of the Situation than any modern audience would be.
Secondly, while this epistle was to be read aloud to the Church in
harmony with early church procedure, it was not then to be destroyed.
On the contrary, it was to be cherished and read and re-read, as well
as circulated among other groups. Thus we could expect a greater
amount of argumentation than would be found in a speech that would
have but one presentation.

Concerning the reasoning employed to support the prOposition of
Paul's independent apostleship, it is evident that this is argument by
signs; and as with all such arguments, it is not conclusive. Inasmuch
however, as the very nature of rhetoric is related to probability and
not demonstration, such arguments can not be considered as inapt.
The reasoning employed concerning the Law is more formal in nature,
and based as it is upon an authority accepted by the Galatians, namely

the Old Testament, it could hardly be excelled in this situation.

305

The themes at the beginning and close of the letter, namely Paul's
personal authority, and the new freedom of the Galatians, have

emotional and ethical overtones which probably did much to reinforce

the logical impact of the whole.

Analysis of Pathos

 

As has already been stated, the first and third sections of this
discourse carry strong emotional overtones and motivating power.
In the first section, Paul by defending his authority had occasion to
review some of the outstanding incidents of his life, and thereby he
probably aroused in his hearers the sentiments of respect, admiration,
and gratitude. In the last two chapters there is Special emphasis upon
the liberty which was now the privilege of the Galatians through the
gOSpel. A strong appeal is made to self-preservation that this liberty
might not be lost by giving heed to the Judaizers.

But most of all, Paul's appeal is made to what he believed was
the basic desire of the human heart--the desire to have peace with God,
and consequent calm of conscience. The overall objective of all his
arguments is to reveal the way Of justification, the way whereby a guilty
soul might find acceptance with his Creator. Through the ages, men
have made as great efforts or greater to achieve this result as they
have to fulfill any material ambition. The following verses indicate
Paul's appeal to the desire of the Galatians for justification, for harmony

with God.

Grace to you and peace from God the Father and our Lord Jesus
Christ, who gave him5elf for our Sins to deliver us from the

present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father. . . .
l: 3, 4 RSV

This Opening blessing abounds with words of emotional and

motivational significance. "Grace, " "peace, " "the Father, " were

306

among the sweetest words in the vocabulary of the early church, and
their use probably had an effect similar to that of great music which
both calms and elevates. The clause "who gave himself for our sins"
was probably calculated to arouse love and gratitude for Christ.

"To deliver us from the present evil age" plucks at the motive of self-
preservation. The overall implication is that this gospel preached by
Paul is able to deliver the Galatians from bondage and fear, and
reconcile them to God.

I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called
you in the grace of Christ and turning to a different gospel--not
that there is another gospel, but there are some who trouble you
and want to pervert the gosPel of Christ. But even if we, or an
angel of heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that
which we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have
said before, so now I say again, If any one is preaching to you a
gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed.
1:6-9 RSV

Warning rolls of thunder seem to reverberate through this passage.
By declaring that the gosPel which some of the Galatians were on the
verge of accepting was a false gospel, and that its teachers were accursed,
Paul suggests that the converts are in danger of stepping into a great
abyss. He hoped to arouse in them what he would have termed "godly
fear, " and what moderns would name as the motive of self-preservation.
The very essence of Paul's appeal to the desire for justification
is found in the arguments of the following passage.

. . . a man is not justified by works of the law but through faith
in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, in order
to be justified by faith in Christ, and not by works of the law,
because by works of the law shall no one be justified. . . . For

I through the law died to the law, that I might live to God. I have
been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ
who lives in me; and the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith
in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do
not nullify the grace of God; for if justification were through the
law, then Christ died to no purpose. 2: 16-21 RSV

 

 

 

 

307

The Apostle warns his hearers that the very object they sought
would be lost if they succumbed to the methods suggested by the
Judaizers. Salvation, he asserts, is not to be gained by mere formal
external obs ervances. Justification is the fruit of union with Christ,
of participation by faith in His crucifixion. Acceptance with God
results when the sinner perceives the personal love of Christ for him,
and in gratitude and love takes hold of the proffered grace of God.
Such is Paul's argument which is so worded as not only to inform but
to endeavor to inspire. The allusion to his own personal experience
as one who has been crucified with Christ is an appeal to emulation.
The warmth of this appeal overflows in his following rebuke.

O foolish Galatians'. Who has bewitched you, before whose eyes
Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified? Let me ask
you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law,

or by hearing with faith? Are‘you SO foolish? Having begun with
the Spirit, are you now ending with the flesh? Did you experience
so many things in vain?--if it really is in vain. Does he who
supplies the Spirit to you do so by works Of the law, or by hearing
with faith? 3:1-5 RSV

The first sentence contains a double allusion. The word trans-
lated "bewitched" properly refers to one who is supposed to be
entranced by the influence of what the ancients called an "evil eye, "
particularly of envy and jealousy. In order to safeguard themselves
from such an influence, the heathen often attached amulets to their
persons, consisting sometimes of a portion of a writing esteemed as

sacred. The word translated "publicly portrayed" proegraphé signifies

 

"Openly written as by large letters. " Possibly this has reference to the
Jewish practice of using phylacteries--tiny parchment scrolls of
Scripture bound between the eyes. See Matthew 23:5. Thus the exPanded
meaning of Paul's words would be somewhat as the following:

O foolish Galatians, --foolish as children, --who was it that
bewitched you with his evil eye of jealousy? who envied you the
liberty of Christ, and desired to spoil you of it? who beguiled

 

308

you, my little children (Ga 4:19), whom I was rearing up as a
father, into men in Christ? who beguiled you back into Judaism,
with its rites and ceremonies and external Observances? Your
false teachers who so deal with you, would have written and
bound before your eyes the scrolls of the Law; they would have
laid upon you its outward fringes and phylacteries, and thus
would have entangled you in bondage. Who envied you the
liberty of the GOSpel, which 1, your Apostle, preached to you?
who bewitched you, before whose eyes was written and bound by
me, as your true Spiritual '. scroll, your frontlet of Faith, your
Spiritual Phylactery, CHRIST CRUCIFIED; and whom I had thus
guarded, as I thought, against all the envious fascination of your
Spiritual enemies? (emphasis his)l

 

 

The ideas are so expressed as to endeavor to arouse in the Galatians
feelings of shame concerning their own Conduct, and indignation as re-
gards their false teachers. The series of questions "are like so many

aculei, darted rapidly forth in a volley from the heart of the Apostle,

 

in the vehement emotion of his indignation and love. ..2

Their memory
of their initial reception of the GOSPel is aroused, and this would necessarily
be accompanied by some similar rush of feeling as was theirs on that
momentous occasion.

After a parenthesis of doctrinal argument, Paul proceeds by refer-
ring again to the original pagan state of the Galatians and the joy where-
with they accepted deliverance from the bondage of heathenism as effected
through the message of the Apostle. With Paul logical argument is rarely
made the terminus, and conclusions are usually made to serve as transi-

tions or introductions to passages with emotional emphasis.

Formerly, when you did not know God, you were in bondage to
beings that by nature are no gods; but now that you have come

to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn
back again to the weak and beggarly elemental spirits, whose
Slaves you want to be once more? You observe days, and months,
and seasons, and years'. I am afraid I have labored over you in
valn.

 

lWordsworth, Vol. 2, p. 56.
2lbic1., p. 57.

309

Brethren, I beseech you, become as I am, for I also have
become as you are. You did me no wrong; you know it was
because of a bodily ailment that I preached the gospel to you at
first; and though my condition was a trial to you, you did not
scorn or despise me, but received me as an angel of God, as
Christ Jesus. What has become of the satisfaction you felt?

For I bear you witness that, if possible, you would have plucked
out your eyes and given them to me. Have I then become your
enemy by telling you the truth? They make much of you, but

for no good purpose; they want to shut you out, that you may make
much of them. For a good purpose it is always good to be made
much of, and not only when I am present with you. My little
children, with whom I am again in travail until Christ be formed

in you'. 4:8-19 RSV
A whole gamut of emotions and motives is encompassed in this passage.
Gratitude was aimed at by the reference to their deliverance from bond-
age, and by the reminiscences concerning their former associations
with their benefactor. The Apostle' 3 expressed fear that he might have
wasted his labour, and his metaphor concerning his "travail" because
of them, was calculated to awaken shame and reproach. The reference
to the previous love of the believers with the inferred contrast to the
existing situation has the same objective, while the allusion to his infirm-
ity would probably arouse pity. It is intimated that the objectives of
the new teachers are selfish, and for those among the Galatians who were
willing to consider this warning, the motive of self-preservation would
be awakened.

Some explanation is required of the words: "I beseech you,
become as I am, for I also have become as you are. " v 12 Probably
the meaning is that the Apostle is suggesting that his converts should
become like him, free from the ceremonial Observances of Judaism.
Some commentators suggest that the meaningiisz "Follow my example for

I forsook my legal ground of righteousness and became as a Gentile

like yourselves . "

310

The latter sense . . . is also more in character with the
intense personal feeling which pervades the passage. '1 gave
up all those time-honored customs, all those dear associations
of race, to become like you. I have lived as a Gentile that I
might preach to you Gentiles. Will you then abandon me, when
I have abandoned all for you?'1

Martin Luther wrote on this verse:

That he gives the Galatians so good words, is as much as to
mix and temper the bitter wormwood drink so with honey and
sugar that it may become sweet and pleasant. Even SO do
parents, when they have well flogged their children, give them
good words, give them gingerbread, apples, pears, nuts and
the like, that the children may take note and understand that
their parents have at heart their good.2

The expression "my little children" Should also be noted, as this
is not found elsewhere in the addresses of Paul. The term suggests
both the tenderness of the Apostle and the weakness of his converts.
Thus it contains both affection and rebuke.

In the fOllowing chapter Paul climaxes his appeal to the desire
Of the Galatians for acceptance with God. He stresses that to follow
the Judaizers is to place themselves outside the pale, and back within
the bondage of heathenism.

For freedom Christ has set us free; stand fast therefore, and
do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. Now 1, Paul, say to
you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no ad-
vantage to you. I testify again to every man who receives
circumcision that he is bound to keep the whole law. You are
severed from Christ, 'you who would be justified by the law;
you have fallen away from grace. For through the Spirit, by
faith, we wait for the hOpe of righteousness. For in Christ
Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail,
but faith working through love. You were running well; who
hindered you from obeying the truth? This persuasion is not
from him who called you. 5: 1-8 RSV

 

lSchrnoller, Lange's Commentary, Vol. 22, p. 106.

 

2Cited by Schrnoller in Lange's Commentary, Vol. 22, p. 110.

 

311

The words "if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no
advantage to you, " are climactic. Hitherto Paul has made no affirm-
ation as strong regarding the results of conforming to the requirements
of the Judaizing teachers. Now however, with his arguments presented,
he does not hesitate to draw conclusions, and such conclusions as will
be most likely to influence the Galatians. The same thought is repeated
in several different ways, thus intensifying the emotional impact.

"Christ will be of no advantage to you, " "You are severed from Christ, "
"You (have fallen away from grace. "

The sentiments and tastes are appealed to in the contrasting
pictures of the false and‘true worshippers.

Now the works of the flesh are plain: immorality, impurity,
licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy,
anger, selfishness, dissension, party Spirit, envy, drunkenness,
carousing, and the like. . . . But the fruit of the Spirit is love,
joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentle-
ness, self-control. . . . And those who belong to Christ Jesus

have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.
5:19-24 RSV

This appeal is continued by the Apostle's call to the spirit of

forgiveness and humility.

Brethren, if a man isovertaken in any treSpass, you who are
Spiritual should restore him in a Spirit of gentleness. Look to
yourself, lest you too be tempted. Bear one another's burdens,
and so fulfil the law of Christ. For if any one thinks he is some.-
thing, when he is nothing, he deceives himself. 6: 1-3 RSV

The motive of self-preservation gives strength to the forceful-
ness of the final warning in this letter.

Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for whatever a man sows,
that he will also reap. For he who sows to his own flesh will
from the flesh reap corruption; but he who sows to the Spirit will
from the Spirit reap eternal life. And let us not grow weary in
well-doing, for in due season we Shall reap, if we do not lose
heart. 6:7-9 RSV '

312

In the closing sentence of the discourse (apart from the bene-
diction) we have a dramatic example of a thought so expressed as to
be likely to have strong emotional impact on the hearers. "Henceforth
let no man trouble me; for I bear on my body the marks of Jesus. "
6:17 RSV He does not merely say "Don't worry me, for I belong to
Christ. " Instead a metaphor is chosen that would most certainly arouse
the memories of the Apostle's own sufferings in his missionary adven-
tures, and also memories which were the most sacred of all, those
concerning Calvary. This reference to the ownership brand on slaves,

and to the stigmata, is further explained in the section on Ethos.

 

Analysis of Ethos

 

It seems characteristic of the Pauline addresses that ethical proof
is markedly present. So much is this the case that we doubt whether
any more than a very small percentage of contemporary public Speaking
reveals an approximate emphasis. It may be that the study of Paul's

Speaking has most to offer us in the area of ethos. The significance

 

for today of this mark of Pauline oratory is discussed in the Conclusion
of this dissertation.
Considering first the arguments which have bearing upon Paul's

1 we would inquire--did Paul "associate either himself or his

character,
message with what is virtuous and elevated?"

There are over eighty references to the Godhead in these six
chapters. The first verse and the last, and practically every paragraph
in between links the arguments Of Paul with the sacred name. The
venerated Scriptures are made to give support to the Apostle's argument

throughout. Seven times in a single chapter Paul quotes from the Old

Testament in support of his contentions. Twelve times the gosPel

1See pages 296-303.

313

itself is named. His relationship with the twelve Apostles is used to
demonstrate his integrity, and the frequent mention of Abraham
ministers to the acceptance of Paul's argument concerning the Law.
It is stated that the essence of his message is "love, joy, peace,
longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance."
Thus there would Seem to be adequate indications that Paul associated
both himself and his message with what is "virtuous and elevated."
Does Paul "bestow, with propriety, tempered praise upon him-
self, his client, and his cause?" The Six arguments of the first two
chapters establishing his apostleship could be considered as praise
regarding himself. This praise is not always "tempered" if we under-
stand the latter in the sense of mitigation. Inasmuch as the self-praise
in this case is not incidental but rather required by the circumstances,
the reason for what otherwise might be considered extravagance can
be seen. The response of someone whose character has been attacked
will usually contain more self-recommendation than would otherwise
be the case. In this case, however, a close examination of Paul's
efforts to vindicate himself reveal that he diSplayed true humility
beneath apparently extravagant claims. Thus while he would seem to
boast concerning the great change that had taken place in his life at
conversion, he is careful to give God the credit for this change.

For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews"
religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church Of
God, and wasted it: and profited in the Jews' religion above
many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly
zealous of the traditions of my fathers. But when it pleased God,
who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by
his grace, to reveal his Son in me. . . . Gal 1:13-16

 

 

Similarly when he "boasts" about the joy of the Christian churches
in Judaea over his conversion he is careful to add: "And they glorified
God in me." 1:24 Thus God, not Paul, is given the credit for the

amazing transformation in the life of the persecutor.

314

In the heart of the letter he makes reference to the great
affection which the Galatians had entertained for him at his first visit.
This is a kind of two-way praise, extending both to the Galatians and
himself. ". . . I bear you record, that, if it had been possible, ye
would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me. "

4: 15 Such love for the Apostle, it is implied, must have had sufficient
cause. Immediately before his farewell benediction, Paul uttered a
unique claim for himself which is full of ethical appeal. "From hence-
forth let no man trouble me: for I bear in my body the marks of the

Lord Jesus." 6: 17. What does he mean by this strange allusion to the

 

"marks" of Christ? The historical impact of this expression can be
seen in the records of the numerous individuals who have claimed to

have received Ta stigmata, the scars of the cross, in their own person.

 

St. Francis of Assisi is a case in point.

Catholic scholars claim that this expression of Paul's took such
a strong hold upon the mind of St. Francis that the very marks of the
Passion seemed to manifest themselves upon his body. This is here
referred to only as indicating the striking nature of Paul's expression.
The historical antecedents of the figure are not hard to trace. Temple
slaves, such as those engaged in the worship of Cybele, were branded
with Signs that indicated their attachment to a certain deity. Paul
claims that the physical scars of his missionary sufferings are evidence
that he has shared the cross of Christ. Coming as it does immediately
after his final appeal to the Galatians to obey his gOSpel, this allusion
is rich in ethical poignancy.

The Apostle has done. He will not dally with these vexatious
attacks upon himself and his authority any more. He dismisses
them with an appeal which ought to be final. , He points to the
scars of wounds which he had received in his Master's service.
The branding-irons of Christ, he says have imprinted these upon
me. They Show that I, like the slaves of a heathen temple, am

315

devoted and consecrated to His service. They are my cre-
dentials, and I shall produce no others. My assailants must
leave me in peace. 1

Does Paul "link the Opponent or the Opponent's cause with what is
not virtuous? " The following are some of the allusions made concerning
the Judaizers at Galatia. They not only suggest that the cause of Paul's
opponents is not virtuous but that the result of adhering to it could be
eternal loss.

I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you
into the grace of Christ unto another gosPel: which is not

another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert

the gOSpel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven,
preach any other gOSpel unto you than that which we have preached
unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now
again, If any man preach any other gosPel unto you than that ye
have received, let him be accursed. 1:6-9

Have I then become your enemy by telling you the truth? They
make much of you, but for no good purpose; they want to Shut
you out, that you may make much of them. 4: 16, 17 RSV

It is those who want to make a good Showing in the flesh that would
compel you to be circumcised, and only in Order that they may
not be persecuted for the cross of Christ. For even those who
receive circumcision do not themselves keep the law, but they

desire to have you circumcised that they may glory in your flesh.
6:12, 13 RSV

In the first verses, Paul emphatically declares that the teachings
of the Judaizers do not constitute a true gospel. The Greek word trans-
lated "pervert" is actually stronger and means "change to its very
Opposite. " Also the term translated "accursed" in this same passage is
literally "Anathema. " Paul thus declares that those who dared to turn
the gospel into an entirely fhlse creed are under the curse of God.

The second passage casts aspersion on the motives of the

schismatics. Paul suggests that it is the desire of these proponents of

 

'Sanday, Ellicott, Vol. VII, p. 463.

316

a false gOSpel to separate the Galatians from the remainder of Gentile
churches in order that they, the Judaizers, might bear complete rule
over them.

In the final passage, Paul points out that another reason for the
stress of these new teachers on the Law was in order that they might
avoid the oppOSition of non-Christian Jews.

It is trouble for themselves that they wish to avoid. Themselves
members of the orthodox Jewish community, different from
other Jews only in that they accepted Jesus as the expected
Messiah, they wish to remain in good standing in the Jewish
community, and to that end wish to be able to point to converts
from the Gentile world who have not merely accepted Jesus as
the Christ, but have also conformed to those physical require-
ments of the Jewish law which from the Jewish point of view
were vital, but to Paul purely external and physical.l

Also, these men in reality do not fully obey the Law of which they
make SO much, adds the Apostle. He has before pointed out that it is
impossible for imperfect human beings to .keep a perfect law, and now
he affirms that this is particularly true of those who broke the first
and great commandment of love by their self-seeking.

Over and against the Judaizing position condemned in 6:12, 13,
Paul sets the contrast of his own stand. .

, But far be it from me to glory except in the cross of our Lord
Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and
I to the world. For neither circumcision counts for anything,
nor uncircumcision, but a new creation. Peace and mercy be
upon all who walk by this rule, upon the Israel of God.

Gal 6: 14-16 RSV

This statement, by its concise picture of true religion, diSparages
the distortion of the opponents more than any lengthy philippic could do.
It would certainly seem that Paul "links the Opponent and the opponent's

cause with what is not virtuous. "

 

'Burton, pp. 349-350.

317

Has Paul "removed or minimized unfavorable impressions of
himself or his cause previously established by his opponents"? We
have already noticed that such was the purpose of the first two chapters
of this letter. The new teachers had diSparaged Paul's claim to
apostleship. (To establish this claim as well as he was able, the
Apostle replied with evidences from various phases of his career,
evidences which indicated his authority as a chosen messenger of God.
In addition to this, the closely woven arguments of the rest of the
epistle Spoke for the ability of the maligned missionary. Thirdly, the
epistle was stamped with indications Of the absolute sincerity of the
original founder of the Galatian church. The following is an example.

For a good purpose it is always good to be made much of, and
not only when I am present with you. My little children, with
whom I am again in travail until Christ be formed in you'.

I could wish to be present with you now and to change my tone,
for I am perplexed about you. 4: 18-20 RSV

By these manifestations Paul hOped "to remove or minimize
unfavorable impressions, " and simultaneously he fulfilled the remaining
criteria suggested by Thonssen and Baird in this regard, namely "the
replying upon authority derived from personal experience, " and
"creating the impression of being completely sincere. "

So much then for the indications in the epistle to the Galatians Of
the probity of Paul's character,, What can be said concerning the
indications of his "competence" ?

As a professed teacher of the GOSpel, Paul's competence would
best be indicated by his revelation of a thorough knowledge of the ways
and purposes of God. As one who professed to be an agent in fulfilling
the Old Testament Scriptures, it would be necessary that he possess an
extraordinary understanding of these writings as revealed by his logical
and apt interpretations of the same. Thus all that has been said under

"analysis of ideas" applies here. It is in Paul's perception of the true

318

nature of Christianity, his emphasis upon b_e_i_r_l_g_rather than (3.3135, his
description of the genuine Christian life as one enshrining love, joy,
peace, etc. , that his competence is manifested. The skillful use of
the sacred writings to prove each major point is another indication of
this. Not the least of the signs of his competence is the fact that the
major exponents of the Christian religion have ever recognized in this
epistle a concise summary of the nature of Christianity.

It is, however, in the first two chapters of this epistle that we
have presented to us particular and direct evidence concerning the
"competence" of Paul. 1 It is here that he replies to criticism regarding
the origin and worth of his teaching. We find hints Scattered through
this passage, intimating the nature of the specific criticisms made by
his Opponents regarding Paul's competence as a teacher.

Apparently it had been asserted that Paul was a mere evangelist
who had been instructed by the Twelve Apostles, and who had now turned
against his teachers to proclaim a gosPel of his own. Also "he had
clearly been reproached with an obsequious disposition, a tendency to
accommodate'himself to the tastes and thoughts of those with whom he
had to do. "2

In reSponse'tO such accusations, the Apostle declares in his
opening remark that he is, "an apostle-“not from men nor through man,
but through Jesus ChriSt and God the Father. . . " v 1 RSV He proceeds
by pointing out that there is only one gOSpel, and that this gosPel is
enshrined in the message which he had preached to them.

I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called
you in the grace of Christ and turning to a different gosPel--not
that there is another gosPel, but there are some who trouble you
and want to pervert the gosPel of Christ. But even if we, or an

 

1See pages 296-303.

2"F. Godet, Introduction to the New Testament, translated by
W. Affleck (Edinburgh: T.& T. Clark, 1899), p. 190.

 

319

angel of heaven, should preach to you a gOSpel contrary to that
which we preached to you, let him be accursed. vs 6-8 RSV

Thus Paul endeavors to turn the tables on his traducers. They

 

have asserted that his gosPel is one of his own devising and therefore
not the genuine message of Christ. I-_1_e_replies that it was his preach-
ing which providence had used to call the Galatians. The intimation is
that if the message which led to their conversion was false, they are
not truly converted. On the other hand, the words infer that if the
gospel they first received was genuine, that which was offered by the
Judaizers must be counterfeit.

The Apostle continues his apologia with rhetorical quest-ions,
and with direct assertion.

Am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? or am I trying
to please men? If I were still pleasing men, I should not be a
servant of Christ.

For I would have you know, brethren, that the gosPel which
was preached by me is not man's gOSpel. For I did not receive
it from man, nor was I taught it, but it camethrough a revelation
of Jesus Christ. For you have heard of my former life in Judaism,
how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy
it; and I advanced in Judaism beyond many of my own age among
my pe0p1e, so extremely zealous was I for the traditions of my
fathers. But when he who had set me apart before I was born,
and had called me through his grace, was pleased to reveal his
Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles,
I did not confer with flesh and blood, nor did I go up to Jerusalem
to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia;
and again I returned to Damascus. 1: 10-17 RSV

The argument implicit in this passage is that "if it was hmnan
glory or approbation he was seeking, he would not have become the
servant of a crucified One, to be everywhere reviled, everywhere perse-
cuted like Him. The path of honour was Open to him among his people.

Why then did he renounce it, and choose that of shame? "1

 

lGodet, pp. 190-191.

320

He further points out that he had known no immediate contact

with the "Official" Apostles. Instead, he retired to Arabia, Where he
preached the gospel received from Christ. On his subsequent return
to Damascus, this ministry of preaching had been continued, and all
this without any "training" from Church leaders.

Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas,

and remained with him fifteen days. But I saw none of the other
apostles except James the Lord's brother. (In what I am writing
to you, before God, I do not lie'. )1 Then I went into the regions

of Syria and Cilicia. And I was still not known by sight to the
churches of Christ in Judea; they only heard it said "He who once
persecuted us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy. "
And they glorified God because of me. 1:18-24 RSV

In these words the Apostle reviews, his whole contact with the
apostolic church in Palestine. He affirms before God that what he writes
is true. In substance, he asserts that his contact with the Apostles had
been too brief and fragmentary for him to have been instructed as a
catechumen by them. Furthermore, the association with the church in
Palestine had been entirely cordial, for the believers had glorified God
concerning his new stand.

In the following chapter Paul, in his attempt to establish his in-
dependent apostleship, offers two more significant facts regarding his
career. Verses one to ten describe the conference at Jerusalem
attended by Paul fourteen years after the events described in the preced-
ing chapter. The narrative of this conference indicates that the Apostles
there gathered together had recognized the authority of Paul as equal
to their own. They had extended to him "the right hand of fellowship. "
In addition to this, according to Paul, they had recognized that his

ministry pertained to the Gentile world, and that this ministry should

 

1In the midst of this argument concerning his competence, we find
this parenthesis with reference to another aspect of ethos--virtue. He
affirms solemnly his truthfulness.

321

be prosecuted without requiring of converts the ceremonial Observances
of Judaism such as circumcision. The second significant fact in this
chapter is that a test case of his authority had arisen in the diSpute
with Peter, with the result that the "new" Apostle had occasion to
correct the Apostle of long standing, (see verses 11-21). When the
prominence of Peter in the early church is considered, it becomes
evident how powerful an argument is Paul's reference to his rebuke Of
that Apostle.

Thus in these first two chapters of his address, Paul has employed
what still seem to be powerful and cogent ‘ arguments regarding his
personal authority. One writer has aptly summarised the nature of the
transition which now takes place in the letter'.

The question of the apostolic authority of Paul is now settled,
but it is as yet only a question of competence, that is to say,

of form. We must go to the foundation of the doctrine preached
by him, and examine its intrinsic truth. But what Shall be the
judge? The Scripture is here; that is what is invoked against
Paul; the law‘, his adversaries say, is established for ever, it
is stable as the heavens themselves. By what right does he
claim to abrogate the institution to which Jesus himself sub-
mitted, and which the apostles still maintain?--The right of the
Scripture itself, St. Paul boldly replies, and this he proceeds
to set forth in the second part Of his letter (chs. iii and iv. ).1

As pointed out elsewhere, it is this masterly andadroit use of
Scripture which further seals the competency Of the maligned Apostle.

We turn to the third constituent of ethical proof, evidence of the
good-will of the speaker. Some of the key verses that have bearing on
this are here repeated. -

Brethren, I beseech you, become as I am, for I also have become
as you are. You did me no wrong; you know it was because of a
bodily ailment that I preached the gospel to you at first; and
though my condition was a trial to you, you did not scorn or

 

lGodet, p. 204.

322

despise me, but received me as an angel of God, as Christ
Jesus. What has become of the Satisfaction you felt? For I
bear you witness that, if possible, you would have plucked out
your eyes and given them to me. Have I then become your
enemy by telling you the truth? . . . My little children, with
whom I am again in travail until Christ be formed in you'.

I could wish to be present with you now and to change my tone,
for I am perplexed about you. Gal 4: 12-20 RSV

In this passage the Apostle not only pours out his own vehement
deSire towards them but he refers to the affectionate attitude which had
formerly characterized the relationship between these new converts
and himself. vIt‘is evident that the thought of their former demonstrations
of love remained for him as a very precious memory. By thus dwelling
upon this former amiable association, Paul indicates that it is his
desire that such interchange of affection shouldever be maintained.
Lovingly, he calls these backsliders "my little children. "

There is another passage in this letter which at first sight might
appear to contradict the indications Of the Apostle's love for his con-
verts. In conveying good-will it is not usual to accuse our hearers of
foolishness. But Paul does so repeatedly in the following passage.

O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you, before whose eyes
Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified? Let me ask
you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law,

- or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun
with the Spirit, are you now ending with the flesh? Did you
experience so many things in vain? Gal 3: 1-4 RSV

While obviously stern in character, even this passage contains indi-
cations of Paul's love. He almost palliates their mistake by suggesting
that surely someone must have cast a bewitching Spell over them.
Considered in the context of the whole letter, probably these verSes
should be viewed as the anxious and grieved expression of a Spiritual
father over his erring children. Had he no feelings of love towards

them, their dereliction could not trouble him half so much.

323

In this consideration of the third classical ingredient ofethisj
namely goodwill, we would suggest that another term should also
find its place under this heading. This term is empathy. The power
of projecting one's personality to the audience and the evidencing of
sympathetic comprehension of its ideals and aims is no small asset
to an orator. The day may well come when the "goodwill" of Aristotle
will be interpreted as including empathy when the former is considered
at its best. This capacity distinguished the Apostle in all his efforts
at communication.

Not only in Galatians but in each epistle there are strong indi-
cations that Paul projected himself into the situation and feelings of his
auditors. Over and above this aSpect is his empathy for mankind in
general. He Speaks as one who feels the pulse-beat of all men.
Conflict and suffering, peace and health, poverty and prosperity, pain
and joy--to none Of these is he a stranger. He has entered richly into
the distinctive experiences of the race, and has the extraordinary
ability of making vocal the feelings that accompany such experiences.
The themes with which he grapples are never petty. They comprehend
massive concepts each of which is vitally related to the life of every
man. For example, here in Galatians, Paul does not narrow down the
issue to the practice or non-practice of circumcision. He sees this
situation as representative of the conflict between true and false
religion. He soars beyond the discussion of a formal rite to the con-
trasting descriptions of the life of bondage, and the life of liberty.

In the soul of every man is the longing for liberty, Paul believes. This
liberty is not just civil or national, it is Spiritual. Man longs to rule
himself and thus be free, but the universal experience is subservience
to what the Apostle calls "the Spirit of bondage, " the control of "the
works of the flesh." Thus the frequent emphasis upon the thought of

324

liberty in this letter. Paul declares that true freedom is the result
of entire surrender to Christ. In such ways does the missionary
orator appeal to the basic hungers of men. In so doing he does not
lose himself in the clouds of ethereal idealism. An example of this
fact is found in the heart of his discussion regarding liberty. After
pointing out that man's true nature finds liberation only in Christ he
proceeds to Show that even the Christian will continue to know the
temptations, though not the domination, of the flesh.

For you were called to freedom, brethren; only do not use your
freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love be
servants of one another. For the whole law is fulfilled in one
word, "You Shall love your neighbour as yourself. " But if you
bite and devour one another take heed that you are not consumed
by one another.

But I say, walk by the Spirit, and do not gratify the desires
of the flesh. For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit,
and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh; for these are

Opposed to each other, to prevent you from doing what you would.
Gal 5: 13-17 RSV

Thus Paul pictures even the man who has been made free as being
still subject to the troublesome "desires of the flesh. " The Apostle is
no impractical visionary conjuring up the ecstatic ideal of a Christian
as one who is always in the ecstasy ofholiness beyond the taint of evil
desire. The description is much more realistic, and in harmony with
the experience of those to whom he Speaks. This is empathy. His
analysis Of the Spirit of man is so accurate that such allusions probably
opened the hearts and minds of his hearers to receive his message.

There is evidence of empathy in a passage that follows closely

upon the above .

Brethren, if a man is overtaken in any tresPass, you who are
spiritual Should restore him in a Spirit of gentleness. Look to
yourself, lest you too be tempted. Bear one another's burdens,
and so fulfil the law of Christ. For if any one thinks he is some-
thing, when he is nothing, he deceives himself. 6: 1-3 RSV

325

By these words Paul gives recognition to the fact that men
constantly fall short of their ideals. Believers also are "overtaken
in treSpasses. " Furthermore those who consider that they themselves
are withou: spot are likely to err by virtue of this self-confidence.
It is "you who are Spiritual" that are admonished "look to yourself,
lest you too be tempted . . . For if any one thinks he is something,
when he is nothing, he deceives himself." By implication the Apostle
is saying that human nature is encompassed with weaknesses of which
most men are not cognizant. Just at the time when a new believer
thinks he is doing fine, he is likely to err by pride or censoriousness or
sudden lapse into "the works of the flesh. " Coincident with this psycho-
logical insight is Paul's manifestation of intense sympathy with his
fellow human beings. He Spends more time warning the self-righteous
than admonishing'the one "overtaken in a treSpass. " -His heart is
evidently towards "the lost sheep, " and he is anxious that an attitude
of rejection should not further discourage the erring believer. This too
reveals empathy. It demonstrates that Paul has known the experiences
to which‘he alludes, and that his warning is directed at himself also,
keeping him on the same level as those he addresses.

When L. H. Mouat Speaks concerning "Identification" in his
"Approach to Rhetorical Criticism" he uses a broad term that includes
this thought of empathy.

If the many rhetorical concepts that produce effectiveness, as
well as the area of effectiveness, can be reduced and simplified,
and if we can approach an isomorphic, or one-to-one, relation-
ship between the Speaker and his Speech, on the one hand, and
the audience (area of effect), on the other, our search for a uni-
fying medium of criticism will be ended. We now prOpose that
the common denominator of rhetorical concepts that produce
effectiveness may be conceived of as a form of identification, as
defined by Kenneth Burke, and that an isomorphic relationship
can be established between societal orders and methods of
identification.

326

Burke explains as follows: "You persuade man only
insofar as you can talk his language by Speech, gesture, tonality,
order, image, attitude, idea, identifying your way with his. "

The term "identification" includes the art of employing tOpics

in such a way that one's prOposals are identified with the beliefs
and desires of the audience and counterproposals with their
aversions, but it is also more extensive and more intensive than
this. Burke would have identification extend beyond the SCOpe of
persuasion to instruction, to inSpiration, and even to delectation
for its own sake. . . .

Identification is a process of becoming "substantially one"
with an audience. It is an attempt to proclaim a unity among men
at odds with one another. "If men were not apart from one another
there would be no need for the rhetorician to proclaim their unity.
If men were wholly and truly of one substance, absolute communi-
cation would be of man's very essence. "1 (emphasis his)

 

Analysis of Arrangement

 

In its broadest sense, diSposition embraces the following matters:
the emergence of a central theme, the general method of arrange-
ment adofied for the Speech, and the order in which the parts of
the discourse are develOped. 2

 

 

 

Concerning the central theme, enough has already been said.
Paul's concern is to Show that Spiritual liberty and acceptance with God
is the result of a living union with Christ through faith. This stands in
contrast to the formalized, religion Of externals as recommended by what
Paul would denominate as "the natural man, " who in this case is repre-
sented by the Judaizers. This theme is found inevery chapter of the
letter, and all other ideas are made to minister to it. The minor themes
of the purpose and place of the Law, and the Gentile Missionary's claim

to Apostleship, are both integrally related to the major theme.

 

1L. H. Mouat, "Approach to Rhetorical Criticism, " The

Rhetorical Idiom, edited by Donald C. Bryant (Ithaca, N. Y.: Cornell
University Press, 1958), pp. 171-172.

 

zThonssen and Baird, p. 393.

327

As regards the method of arrangement, there is no single one.
The historical, distributive, and logical methods are employed. 1
In the first two chapters which argue the issue of Paul's Apostleship
in terms of the highlights of his experience, the historical method is
found. In the last four chapters we have both the distributive and the
logical methods intermingled as the contrasting implications Of legalism
and the gOSpel are drawn out.

There are three main sections to the epistle, each consisting of

two chapters; and the order is first personal, secondly doctrinal and

 

 

thirdly hortatory. It should be mentioned that this is a logical order of

 

arrangement, inasmuch as doctrinal discussion needs to be prefaced
by personal authority of some kind, and also because exhortation must
have for its foundation certain proved facts of doctrine.

The introduction is abrupt and startling. It is calculated to warn
rather than to woo. Its very direct manner, however, was probably
effective in compelling attention; and certainly the purpose of the follow-
ing discourse was clearly stated.

The authoritative rebuke that is found in the introduction would
constitute a poor beginning from any person who was a stranger to the
Galatians, or from one who had no strong bond of affection between
himself and this church. Considered, however, as the chastisement of

a Spiritual father, it is by no means out of place. It is doubtful whether

 

1"According to the historical basis Of division, material is
arranged in chronological order. . . .

According to the distributive method of arrangement, matters
having a common thought center and an Obvious connection among them-
selves are grouped in certain sections. . . .

Finally, the logical order may characterize the basis of division.
In such cases, the arrangement of materials is determined by the con-
tinuity of the reasoning process; materials are placed at those points
where they serve as links in the uninterrupted sequences or chains of
thought." Thonssen and Baird, pp. 394-395.

328

any other kind of introduction under these Circumstances would have

served as well.

This Opening salutation is intentionally abrupt and bare.
Usually it was the Apostle's custom to begin with words of
commendation. He praises all that he can find to praise even
in a Church that had offended so seriously as the Corinthians.
(See 1 Cor 1:2, 4-7.) But the errors of the Galatians, he feels,
go more to the root Of things. The Corinthians had failed in
the practical application of Christian principles; the Galatians
(so far as they listened to their Judaising teachers) could

. hardly be said to have Christian principles at all. The Apostle
is angry with them with a righteous indignation, and his anger
is seen in the naked severity of this address. 1

Paul was probably aware that the heat of forest fires sometimes
succeeds in causing seeds to Sprout where the genial rays of the sun
have failed. On some such principle he is more direct and abrupt at
the Opening of this letter than of any other. As the discourse proceeds,
however, the evidences of his great affection for the believers shines
like sunshine through the clouds of rebuke.

The body of the address is more closely knit than is the case with
either of the letters to the Corinthians. Here digressions are few, and
one argument follows another. The Spirit of leisure is missing, and
instead the tone is urgent and compelling. This also was appropriate
in order to confront the Situation of apostasy in Galatia. Like the intro-
duction, the conclusion is abrupt and incisive. "For neither circurn—
cision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation.
Peace and mercy be upon all who walk by this rule, upon the Israel
of God. ‘Henceforth let no man trouble me; for I bear on my body the
marks of Jesus. The grace Of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your Spirit,

brethren. Amen. " There is no lengthy list of personal greetings to

 

'sanday, Ellicott, Vol. VII, p. 427.

329

church members such as we find in Romans, and to a lesser extent in
other epistles. The Apostle thus intimates the urgency for immediate
repentance and reformation before the former complete cordiality

can find once more its free expression. It could be said concerning the
concluding seven verses that their purpose included the "inspiring of

the audience with a favorable Opinion of Paul (who bore the stigmata);

an unfavorable one of his adversaries (who are described here as
glorying in externals); the providing of an amplification of the theme

(vs 15, 16); the exciting of the emotions of the Galatians (v 17 eSpecially);

and the recalling of facts to their memory (vs 12-15). "1

Style

Most of the remarks on Paul's style are reserved for a separate
chapter. A few things, however, should here be mentioned. First of
all, there is an evident contrast between the style of Galatians and
that of 1 Corinthians, although both letters rebuke churches in danger
of backsliding. To the Corinthians the Apostle had written with a
sympathetic tenderness which took into account the many environmental
pressures to which the believers in that "Vanity Fair" were subjected.
His rebukes had been greatly tempered, recognizing the constitutional
weaknesses of those who had Spent their lives in the unrestrained ways
of dis solute paganism. Immediately we turn to the letter to the Galatians
we are struck with the abruptness and severity of its tone. The "kid
gloves" have been removed, for the Galatians could not claim the
extenuating circumstances which partly excused the Corinthians.
Furthermore, the urgency of the situation was greater because the

Galatians were nearer to apostasy than the believers at Corinth.

 

1Aristotle, The Rhetoric, Book iii, p. 19, quoted by Thonssen
and Baird, p. 398.

 

330

Sharpness of tone was necessary to shock the former into a realization
of their peril. The same sharpness as pursued throughout the message
to the Galatians may have had for the Corinthians, if so addressed, the
effect Of discouragement. We discern in this difference of style

"a willingness to adopt . . . to a particular set of circumstances. "1

Secondly, the style of Galatians is the style of the diatribe.

 

It "is characterized by quotation from past or anticipated objectors and

rapid fire answer to them. "2

This style was prominent in the first
century of this era, and is further exemplified by another letter in the
New Testament, the Epistle of James.

The fact that Galatians is composed in the form of a diatribe
explains the existence of a number of abrupt transitions such as 1:10, 11;
5:25; 5:12 and 6:7, 15. It is as though the Apostle were actually survey-
ing his audience, and occasionally Spies some antagonist, or catches the
cry of an objector. He thereupon cuts short his remarks on the present
subject, and addresses himself to an issue which he suSpects is being
questioned, or casts some verbal dart he considers appropriate.

In a few cases, as has been mentioned earlier, there are sentences
which are involved or cut short. Examples of curtailment can be found
in 2:3-5; 4:14; 4:24.

So rich was the treasure of Paul's life in Christ that he never
found it easy to put it into words, least of all in Galatians.
Although the epistle was composed neither carelessly nor
hastily, the anxiety and emotional stress under which Paul dic-
tated his cascading thoughts have produced some involved and
obscure sentences.3

This quotation should not be understood as implying that Paul'r's

resources of language were in any way inadequate. The difficulty was

 

lThonssen and Baird, p. 430.
ZStamm, Interpreter's Bible, v. 10, p. 442.
3lbid.

 

 

331

that on some occasions his fertile brain Spawned ideas with greater
rapidity than it could verbalize them.

On the whole, however, Paul's style was effective, including as
its components "(1) an idea worth presenting, (2) an unmistakably clear
conception of the idea, (3) a desire to communicate it, (4) a willingness

to adapt it to a particular set of circumstances, and (5) a mastery of

language adequate to express the idea in words. "1

Results

There is no way of ascertaining what were the immediate effects
of the letter to the Galatians. However, the long range effects upon
the early Christian church are traceable to some degree. Farrar has
summed up excellently the evidence of the first two centuries in this

regard.

What was the effect of the Epistle on the Churches of Galatia
we cannot tell; but for the Church of Christ the work was done.
By this letter Gentiles were freed for ever from the peril of
having their Christianity subjected to impossible and carnal
conditions. In the Epistle to the Romans circumcision does not
occur as a practical question. Judaism continued, indeed, for
some time to exercise over Christianity a powerful influence,
but in the Epistle of Barnabas circumcision is treated with
contempt, and even attributed to the deception of an evil angel;
in the Epistle of Ignatius, St Paul's distinction of the true and
false circumcision is absolutely accepted; and even in the
Clementine Homilies, Judaistic as they are, not a word is said
of the necessity of circumcision, but he who desires to be un-
Hellenised must be so by baptism and the new birth.Z

 

1Thonssen and Baird, p. 430.
zFarrar, St. Paul, p. 443.

332

VI. THE DISCOURSE TO THE PHILIPPIANS

It is the most beautiful of all Paul's letters. 1

With passages full of elegant negligence (1:29), like Plato's
dialogues, and Cicero's letters, it has passages of wonderful
eloquence, and proceeds from entirely outward, Special, rela-
tions and circumstances to wide-reaching thoughts and grand
conc eptions . 2

His letter is like one of those magnificant pieces of music which,
amid all its stormy fugues and mighty discords, is dominated by
some inner note of triumph which at last bursts forth into irre-
sistible and glorious victory. . . [yet] The letter was dictated
by a worn and fettered Jew, the victim of gross perjury, and the
prey of contending enmities; dictated by a man of feeble frame,
in afflicted circumstances, vexed with hundreds Of opponents,
and with scarce one friend to give him consolation.3

The Occasion

 

The City and the Church of Philippi

Philippi was the most easterly of the Roman cities in the province
of Macedonia. It was situated on a highway which stretched from
Dyrrachiurn on the Adriatic to the Hellespont. By virtue of this position
on the Egnatian Road, the city was frequented by citizens of all lands.

It had become in Paul's day a meeting-place of East and West.

The city of Philippi was a monumental record of two vast empires.
It had once been an obscure place, called Krenides from its
streams and Springs; but Philip, the father of Alexander, had
made it a frontier town, to protect Macedonia from the Thracians,

 

lThe Interpreter's Bible, Vol. 10, p. 12.

 

zBraune, cited in Lange's Commentary, Vol. 22, p. 4.

 

3Farrar, Messages, p. 303.

 

333

and had helped to establish his power by the extremelyprofit-
able working of its neighboring gold mines. Augustus, proud

of the victory over Brutus and Cassius, --won at the foot of the
hill on which it stands, and on the summit of which Cassius

had committed suicide, --elevated it to the rank of a colony,
which made it, as St. Luke calls it, if not the first yet certainly
"a first city of that district of Macedonia. "1

Cities of Roman provinces were either municipia (free towns)

 

or coloniae (colonies). The‘latter enjoyed peculiar privileges chief

of which was (in most cases) the exemption from taxation of landed
property. The colonies were miniatures of Rome itself, and the
inhabitants were Roman citizens with the right of franchise. Not by the
governor of the province, but by their own senate and magistrates

were such communities governed. Usually the Roman law and the Latin

language prevailed in the coloniaea.

 

In Paul's day, at Philippi "the pOpulation was composed of three
main elements. First, there were the Roman colonists, the dominant
caste; then there were the native Macedonians, numerically the strong-
est section; and finally there was a considerable admixture of Orientals.
. . . "7‘ Probably because there was little in the way of commerce at
Philippi, the number of resident Jews was small.

In view of its strategic position in EurOpe, Philippi became the
site for initial missionary endeavour by the early church. The story
of this beginning is found in the sixteenth chapter of Acts. The author
of the record claims that Paul in a vision saw "a man of Macedonia. . .
beseeching him and saying, "Come over to Macedonia and help us; "

Acts 16:9 RSV The narrative continues: "And when he had seen the

vision, immediately we sought to go on into Macedonia, concluding

 

lFarrar, St. Paul, p. 274.
2David Smith, p. 127.

334

that God had called us to preach the gospel to them" v 10 RSV
Thus Philippi became the temporary home of the one called to be the
Apostle to the Gentiles.

On a Sabbath morning Paul, Silas, Timothy and Luke, repaired
to a secluded nook on the river-bank, where it was reported a few
Jews gathered weekly for worship. Apparently there was no synagogue
in the city, because of the paucity of Jewish believers. To their sur-
prise the evangelists found women only in the (little assemblage. Paul
preached nevertheless, and gained a notable convert in Lydia, "from
the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods." v 14 RSV Apparently
this woman was a Gentile who had become a proselyte to Judaism.

She seems to have been prOSperouS, for the narration indicates that
She owned a commodious residence to which She invited the new teachers.
Lydia was Christianity' 5 first convert in EurOpe. Probably her home
became the meeting place of the growing church.

The next group of converts was won more dramatically than the
first. When making their way to a prayer-meeting, Paul and Silas were
followed by a Slave-girl who served her masters as a‘ fortune teller.
Possibly this girl was afflicted with epileptic diathesis which was one
of the qualifications for a Pythoness of Delphi. 1 On this occasion she
pursued the missionaries, calling out vigorously so as to attract the
attention of bystanders to herself, Paul, and Silas. This behaviour
continued for days until the patient Spirit of Paul gave way. Turning
around, the Apostle administered a sharp rebuke. The wild, unnatural
screaming ceased, and such a transformation seemed to take place in
the slave-girl that her masters decided she was of no further use to
them as a source of income by divination. The results are described

by Luke as follows.

 

lThe feminine diviners of Delphi were called pythonesses after
the Pythian Apollo.

335

But when her owners saw that their hOpe of gain was gone, they
seized Paul and Silas and dragged them into the market place
before the rulers; and when they had brought them to the magis-
trates they Said, "These men are Jews and they are disturbing
our city. They advocate customs which it is not lawful for us
Romans to accept or practice. " The crowd joined in attacking
them; and the magistrates tore the garments off them and gave
orders to beat them with rods. And when they had inflicted many
blows upon them, they threw them into prison, charging the
jailer to keep them safely. Having received this charge, he put
them into the inner prison and fastened their feet in the stocks.

But about midnight Paul and Silas were praying and sing-
ing hymns to God, and the prisoners were listening to them, and
suddenly there was a great earthquake, so that the foundations
of the prison were Shaken; and immediately all the doors were
opened and every one's fetters were unfastened. When the jailer
woke and saw that the prison doors were Open, he drew his sword
and was about to kill him5elf, supposing that the prisoners had
escaped. But Paul cried with a loud voice, "Do not harm yourself,
for we are all here. " And he called for lights and rushed in, and
trembling with fear he fell down before Paul and Silas, and
brought them out and said, "Men, what must I do to be saved, ?"
And they said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved,
you and your household. " And they spoke the word of the Lord to
him and to all that were in his house. And he took them the same
hour of the night, and washed their wounds, and he was baptized
at once, with all his family. Then he brought them up into his
house, and set food before them; and he rejoiced with all his
household that he had believed in God.

But when it was day, the magistrates sent the police, say-
ing, "Let those men go." And the jailer reported the words to
Paul, saying, "The magiStrateS: have sent to let you go; now
therefore come out and go in peace. " But Paul said to them,
"They have beaten us publicly, uncondemned, men who are Roman
citizens, and have thrown us into prison; and do they now cast us
out secretly? No'. let them come themselves and take us out. "
The police reported these words to the magistrates, and they were
afraid when they heard that they were Roman citizens; so they
came and apologized to them. And they took them out and asked
them to leave the city. So they went out of the prison, and visited
Lydia; and when they had seen the brethren, they exhorted them
and departed. Acts 16:19-40 RSV

336

These events took place about the end of 52 A. D. The nucleus
of believers was left to its own resources while the Apostle preached
in other cities, and it was not until five years later that he was able to
visit them again (Acts 20:1). The third visit took place after the
tumult at Ephesus. On this occasion Paul was Specially engaged in
the collection for the poverty- stricken believers at Jerusalem. Accord-
ing to his statement to the Corinthians (2 Cor 8: 1-5), he found the
Christians at Philippi not only willing to give their goods but also to
give themselves for the work of the gospel. This would have been in
58 A. D. The final visit was made in the spring of the following year
on the way to Jerusalem. Judging from the documents extant, there
was no church as endeared to Paul as this one at Philippi. He calls it

"his joy and crown" Phil 4: 1.

Paul's Circumstances at the Time of the
Writing of This Epistle

 

 

The last eight chapters of the book of Acts describe the adven-
tures of Paul between the time Of his last visit to Philippi and his letter
to them from a Roman prison.

While at Jerusalem, he had been taken into custody by Roman
soldiers as the result of a Jewish riot and accusations made by his own
countrymen. After many delays, including 'a lengthy imprisonment ”at
Caesarea, the Apostle was taken to Rome for trial. His arrival in this
city was probably in the spring of 56 A. D. , during the reign of Nero.

In the subsequent term of two years' imprisonment he wrote Ephesians,

 

Colossians, Philemon, and -Philippians.

 

 

 

Some knowledge of the local church at Rome is necessary in order
to understand fully the significance of certain passages in the letters

written from that city. The Christian congregation at the heart of the

337

Empire did not owe its origin to Paul. The early stages of its develop-
ment are nowhere chronicled, but scholars believe it was probably
established by converts to Christianity who had been sojourners in
Jerusalem at the time of Pentecost. Judging from the epistle to the
Romans, which was written three or four years before Paul's arrival
in that city, the local church was significant in either numbers or
influence. The long list of salutations at the end of Romans infers this.
Both Jews'and Gentiles were in'the church, but the latter predominated.

Within three days of Paul's arrival at Rome, he resumed evangel-
istic work. The praetorian prefect, apparently kindly disposed,
permitted the prisoner to occupy a lodging of his own under the charge
of a Roman soldier. His friends and other visitors were permitted
free access to him for at least the first part of his captivity. Luke's
record reads as follows:

And when we came to Rome, the centurion delivered the prisoners
to the captain of the guard: but Paul was suffered to dwell by
himself with a soldier that kept him. And it came to pass, that
after three days Paul called the chief of the Jews together. . . .
And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him
into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom
Of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of
Moses, and out of the prOphets, from morning till evening.

Acts 28:16, 17, 23

According to the letter we are now studying, this zeal of Paul's
was not without fruit. His imprisonment "turned out" to the great
"furtherance of the gosPel. "

But I Would ye Should understand, brethren, that the things which
happened unto me have fallen out rather unto the furtherance of
the gosPel; so that my bonds in Christ are manifest in all the
palace, and in all other places; and many of the brethren in the
Lord, waxing confident by my bonds, are much more bold to
Speak the word without fear. Phil 1: 12-14

338

Converts were made in Caesar's own household, and among the
Praetorian guard. The Roman believers, stirred by such an example ,
proved more diligent in their own proclamation of the Christian
message. Among them, however, there existed some measure of
Jewish-Gentile dissension. Thus Paul's declaration that some were
preaching Christ with contention, "not sincerely, supposing to add
affliction to my bonds. " 1: 16 One result of this partisanship was that
the pressing needs of the aged prisoner seem to have slipped out of
sight. There is no evidence that the Roman believers contributed to
his support. Paul sadly writes to the Philippians that "all seek their
own interests." 2:21 (orig.)

The Apostle was in sore need. He was not indeed actually
destitute, for he had been well furnished by the liberality of the
people of Melita; but he had to meet the expense of his rental
and maintenance at Rome, nor was he permitted to go abroad
and earn a wage by plying his craft of tent-making. And he was
a stranger in the vast Metr0polis. The Church there was not
his foundation. Its members were bound to him by no ties of
gratitude and affection, and the converts whom he had won since
his arrival belonged to the poorer order--soldiers of the
Praetorian Guard and slaves of the imperial household. They
could afford him nothing. His little store was fast dwindling, and
unless he were brought speedily to trial he must be destitute.l

Occasion and Purpose of the Epistle

 

We do not know how word of the Apostle's plight reached the
church at Philippi. Possibly Luke had journeyed to that district. Some.
commentators believe that the "true yokefellow" referred to in the last
chapter of the letter was "the beloved physician. " Upon receipt of the
news, the Philippians raised a generous sum of money and sent it with

Epaphroditus to Rome. On seeing the plight of the Apostle, Epaphroditus

 

'David Smith, p. 508.

339

decided to remain and minister to the needs of Paul. According to
Horace,1 autumn was not a salubrious season at Rome, and it may
have been during this season that the messenger from Philippi became
dangerously ill. While he was convalescing, a message arrived from
the believers at his home-church anxiously inquiring about himself
and Paul. Epaphroditus decided to return to Philippi, and to take
with him a message dictated by the Apostle.

It is Obvious that the purpose of Paul's message would include
thanksgiving for the Philippian gift, and the giving of news concerning
his welfare. There is however, a far more'important theme in his
letter than either of these. From the report given him by Epaphroditus,
Paul learned that his favorite church was threatened with certain
dangers. In a church hitherto renowned for its harmony, certain ani-
mosities and cliques were incipient. There were some who were
disputing over petty questions of precedence (1:27; 2:2-4), others were
giving heed to visiting Judaizers (3: 1-3), and two of the deaconesses
had experienced a disagreement (4: 2, 3). Even though noneof these
failings had yet assumed any position of grave importance, and the
majority of the Philippians were persevering in holy conduct, Paul
foresaw the possibility of an approaching crisis. He was aware, that
"a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump" (1 Cor 5:6), and he desired
to crush at their outset these threats to the unity and spiritual prosPerity
of the church in Macedonia. This is Paul's main purpose in his address
to the Philippians.

A subsidiary purpose apparently entertained by the Apostle was
to indicate the joyfulness of the true Christian life. These Christians

had been mourning on his behalf, and also were anxious concerning

 

lEpist 1,vii, 1-9; David Smith, p. 509.

340

Epaphroditus. Paul wished lovingly to admonish them that they should
"have no anxiety about anything" Phil 4:6 RSV, and that they should
ever "rejoice" in the Lord. " Phil 3:1

The church at Philippi appears to have been one of the most

pure and generous of that age. Its members showed the tender-
est regard for Paul. Twice while he was at Thessalonica, and
once when at Corinth, they had sent him contributions for his
support, which he accepted, to prevent the gosPel being burden—
some tO more recent converts (4:15, 16; 2 Cor 11:9). They had
also cheerfully borne many sufferings for their adherence to the
Saviour (1:28-30). Their conduct had been uniformly so exemplary
that he had only to rejoice over them. Accordingly, in this
epistle, he pours forth his heart in expressions of devout thankful—
ness and hearty commendations, not unmingled, however, with
exhortations and counsel. 1

Analysis of the DeveIOpment of Ideas, with
Emphasis Upon Logical Proof

 

 

Most of the ideas contained in this discourse could be placed in
One of three groups whose respective headings would be, Unity, Joy,
and Love. Certain words occur repeatedly, indicating the themes of
the letter. For example the expression "you all, " indicative of the
thought of unity, is found eight times. In other epistles of similar length
the average occurrence of this phrase is only twice. Similarly the
words "joy" and "rejoice" occur seventeen times, more often by far
than in any other epistle of Paul's.

Aware of the incipient threats to the harmony of the church at
Philippi, the Apostle places most emphasis upon the idea of unity.
We shall consider the main passages which relate to this theme.

My desire is [to depart and be with Christ . . . But to remain
in the flesh is more necessary on your account. Convinced of
this, I know that I shall remain and continue with you all, for
your progress and joy in the faith. . . .

 

1Joseph Angus, The Bible Handbook. Revised by Samuel G. Green.
(London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1952), p. 719.

 

341

Only let your manner of life be worthy of the gospel Of
Christ, so that whether I come and see you or am absent, I
may hear of you that you stand firm in one spirit, with one
mind striving side by side for the faith of the gospel, and not
frightened infanything by your Opponents. This is a clear omen
to them of their destruction, but of your salvation, and that
from God. For it has been granted to you that for the sake of
Christ you Should not only believe in him but also suffer for his
sake, engaged in the same conflict which you saw and now ,
hear to be mine. 1:23-30 RSV

 

 

Paul declares that he longs to finish his course that he might
know the presence Of Christ. Nevertheless, he is hoping to be released
from imprisonment in order that he might be further used to aid the
Christian growth of these believers. Having asserted this, he urges
them unitedly to resist evil, whether he is able to come to them or not.
The Greek word translated "manner of life" is literally "citizenship. "
Thus he infers: "You count it a privilege to be citizens of Rome, and
subjects of Caesar. How much more important is it that you behave as
citizens of heaven, and loyal subjects of Jesus Christ." Three times in
one sentence the thought of unity is expressed by the terms "one Spirit, "
"one mind, " and "side by Side. " The words "striving side by side"
constitute a metaphor associated with the Grecian games where athletes
engaged in hand-to-hand contests. The verb is also employed with
reference to contending in battle. Thus Paul likens the believers to
warriors or athletes on the same side, unitedly repulsing the antagonists.
Such unity and fearlessness will intimate to Opposers that the Christians
have God as their Helper. It is apparent from these verses that the
church at Philippi had continued to share the persecution from un-
believers that had been the lot of the original missionaries in that city.

The preceding passage is Paul's plea for unity despite the opposi-

 

tion from outside the church. It is immediately succeeded by an appeal

 

for unity despite troubles from within the church.

342

So if there is any encouragement in Christ, any incentive of
love, any participation in the Spirit, any affection and sympathy,
complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same
love, being in full accord and of one mind. Do nothing from
selfishness: or conceit, but in humility count others better than
yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests,
but also to the interests of others. Have this mind among yOur-
selves, which you have in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in
the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be
graSped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant,
being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human
form he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even
death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and
bestowed on him the name which is above every name, that at
the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth
and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ
is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. 2: 1-11 RSV

 

 

Having previously hinted at the necessity for unity by his allusion
to "one Spirit" and "one soul, " Paul now expands this by a direct
exhortation to unity. Four times in a single sentence the thought is
embodied by the phrases "the same mind, " "the same love, " "in full
accord, " and "of one mind. " Such unity should be the logical outcome
of the blessings believers share in Christ--this is the force of the
parallel four-fold structure of the first verse. The next two verses
express the negative and positive results of unity, reSpectively. Thus
not only will nothing. be done from motives of selfishness and conceit
(v 3), but each will actively endeavour to assist his fellows (v 4). Then
follows the greatest and most appropriate example Paul could possibly
have cited, the example of Christ. Christ is pictured as existing in
glory before His incarnation, in order to underline the depths of His
condescension. This is emphasized still further by the expression
"even death on :a cross" which to contemporaries expressed the greatest
possible Shame and obloquy. To die on the cross was evidence that

one was "accursed of God." (See Gal 3:13) It is not unreasonable that

  
    
  

. ' , - , c a ‘ v~ O i; 1:151
‘ ’ X _ ‘ ‘g . .1: L, 5‘ [1(1 Ill”
c e l , e . .‘.-‘ [i ' v ”i”-
. c - It - {119
a K i . ‘~ ~ » A. —
- c. , ' a- so . :vao“
- e . ‘c e - 37.3 0'
~ ‘ . - _ r 'f , .1
- . ‘t mang'
‘ l l‘
r , e c e :m-
a i l A“(‘ 'I
; l _ - m.‘
r ‘ if r e - .
7 H x _ _ I‘ _
- ~ - - - , u -. u T‘ 1‘
- V L ,
l c c r ‘ - ‘1
\ \
I l '
1‘ g V _, l . ._ '31 1.
.. u
c c c e c ‘s ' (“17.-11101 _' y
- - - , e l , c ‘ ' :rlzt '. -
., , ;.v
r r c - \ . :." it“ by
,3
r r . — 1- t, -1‘11‘1' 8317”
I '1
, .
.. - e - . e L c ' .J‘ lti-I O‘-
' .
, c e . - _ a - ~ criwgsnw'
h. ‘,
c ” e . c e - ,ruhcan

   
 

‘~ ....
I 1 ‘. .’L .. -...‘:r:o._9
J a n I -“ [I L - ‘ a’uf‘.‘ 8'
. - a a 1
;. E e . c c ' . e ‘v 1 .c - .1' T .-
l
4‘1; .2. ' . -1 - ’; l . c. ; s' - 'rlritxs
.. '.- . ' ' _ ,_,_ , , v '
- and. o .’-£-T...'f 1 _ ...-... ;£ JUN/(41011.6 ‘. .
A.

35d? 5M5nc-afiezt'u in. 5.1;: (: T27 2:. u )

  

343

Christians should humble themselves to serve their fellows, or to
forego their "rights" for the sake of unity, Paul is, saying. If the
Lord and Master of Christians did this Himself, logically believers
should follow His example. (This remarkable appeal based on the
incarnation and death of Christ will be considered at greater length
under pathetic proof.)

The words which follow in the text are a continuation of the theme
Of unity. They are linked to the preceding by "therefore. "

Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now,
not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work
out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for God is at
work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.

Do all things without grumbling or questioning, that you
may be blameless and innocent, children of God without blemish
in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among Whom
you shine as lights in the world, . . . 2: 12-15

 

There is no direct rebuke to the church in this passage, nor in
any part of the letter. But it is here implied that there were some
members who threatened to disturb the prevailing harmony by their
grumbling and by their expression of doubts. Paul calls upon them to
"work out" the experience of salvation that has been begun in them by
God. They are to engage in self- examination with "fear and trembling"
for it is God, not man, with whom they have primarily to do.
Furthermore, there is the witness of the church to the world to be
cOnsidered, says Paul. Christians are called to be luminaries amid
the prevailing darkness of paganism. How can believers fulfill this
Obligation unless they are at unity among themselves ?

Paul has buttressed this chapter with powerful examples in order
to Show that the attitude of mind and heart for which he pleads is the
natural and rational behaviour of every believer in God. He has already

mentioned the example of Christ. Now he proceeds to indicate his own

  
  
  
  
  
  
   
  
    
       
     
  
  

. I

v , ‘1

c . 11L? ;' , m. lluotfit'
. h . a

_ .5.3‘ ml unlit!"
1.703103.‘

) .c . . c .1Hw
l
2-5;? .I-ux. -

(. i114 :‘IU‘c-m"

- ‘ 2: am:

e, -. - . -- ‘ H 1...' '(N‘fr 5:8"

Iv . g _ 'gzo-ja .3
e t _ -; f 1; vlno‘
I , f 'lum“; -'
' .17“ v at G
‘J _, , ..;' I r. ((1
a _ {Ltd ed
_ , jg. 1M 4.”
- ,. 1. 511111.; “
z ' c f .. .1 'I Hi 9 it
. 1,1.
.‘ 1.3.1:! eds 4'
. I‘,‘
-1 Lil-“L'xiij ”VS,
1 c Salk? vd baa. }
I

L -..; cont, or“ W
7. I"‘

a" e - 1‘; :1 91$: -I

e; , nzjon ,-~_j

_ ‘. _ Loved} ,4
,4

I . ,_ . 11.;1',‘ 83:58.,
.‘ "'5’

rug-2:51) 3.7,:

C- .

\x; r .V g. . .- lfodi 89.16:)", ,
- .- r; _ escort-Jude’- -,_.
- we

.” l" LUdlflSfl

 

. J. _ 5J3"?
‘19
. I
,r‘l
0
I
.

344

readiness to serve to the end, and the similar diSposition in his fellow
worker Timothy. Following his plea that the Philippians might be
true lights the Apostle adds:

. . . so that in the day of Christ I may be proud that I did not
run in vain or labor in vain. Even if I am to be poured as a
libation upon the sacrificial Offering of your faith, I am glad
and rejoice with you all. . . .

I hOpe in the Lord Jesus to send Timothy to you soon, so
that I may be cheered by news of you. I have no one like him,
who will be genuinely anxious for your welfare. They all look
after their own interests, not those of Jesus Christ. But
Timothy's worth you know, how as a son with a father he has
served with me in the gospel. 2: 16-22 RSV

The examples of humility and service in Christ, Paul, and

Timothy, belong to the realm Of pathos as well as logos insofar as they

 

constitute psychological appeal in addition to rational argument. We know
little of Paul's manner of Speech, if we fail to graSp the fact that though
his mind is pre-eminently logical, pathetic and ethical appeals are
inevitably tied to his argument. In this present case, the personal
examples found in the lives Of Christ, Timothy, and himself, represent
the strongest of evidence regarding the nature of the genuine Christian
life. Paul and Timothy had been the founders of the church at Philippi,
and they had lived their gOSpel in addition to preaching it. The visual
conceptions of the Philippians regarding a Christian had been shaped by
the portrayal in the lives of their evangelists. The citing of such
examples, therefore, was entirely appropriate in the argument of this
discourse, and was likely to evoke suitable emotional reaction as well
as mental assent.

In the following chapter, the Apostle discusses another threat to
unity. This time the problem is not related to overt opposition from

unbelievers (1:27-30), or from the faults of the local believers (2: 14, 15).

 

arm 13' swisoJ l,

..

-..

'1113 ()8 , '

.~ ~11»! "1»

   

en iml-j

/\
V

‘ s

c...) i181”. '
mi tannin" '

.1.

{--

l
w a.

J:

,, I

evil ' 3 _‘

.~

1.11:) '10 ‘-

AL

' ed: M

. .J

 

345

The source of the trouble consists in the persons and teachings Of the
ubiquitous Judaizers.

To write the same things to you, to me indeed is not grievous,
but for you it is safe. Beware Of dogs, beware of evil workers,
beware of the concision. For we are the circumcision, which
worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have
no confidence in the flesh. 3: 1-3

The context indicates that Judaizing Christians in the neighbour-
hood of Philippi were engaged in making a threefold attack upon the
orthodox believers. These Gentile converts had been stigmatised as
'uncircumcised dogs.‘ (cf Deut 23:18; Mt 7:6; 15:26). Secondly, Paul
had been assailed as to his teaching and authority, and thirdly, the
familiar charge that the emphasis upon faith tended to relax moral
obligation had been made. In response to the epithet first mentioned,
the Apostle declares that it truly belongs to the Judaizers themselves,
inasmuch as they by their conduct place themselves outside the pale of
the church and thus become as "unclean" as the canine Species. Also:

. . . there may be some allusion to the dogs, not as unclean,
but as, especially in their half-wild state in the East, snarling
and savage, driving off as interlopers all who approach what
they consider their ground. Nothing could better describe the
narrow Judaising Spirit.l

"Beware of the concision" is another adroit use of words.

By an ironical play upon words St. Paul declares his refusal to
call the circumcision, on which the Judaisers prided themselves,
by that time-honoured name; for "we, " he says, "are the true
circumcision, " the true Israel of the new covenant. In Eph 2:2

. . . he has denoted it as the "so-called circumcision in the
flesh made by hands. " Here he Speaks more strongly, and calls
it a "concision, " a mere outward mutilation, no longer, as it
had been, a "seal" of the covenant (Rom 4: 11).2

 

lAlfred Barry, "The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Ephesians,
Philippians, and Colossians, " Ellicott's Commentary on the Whole Bible.
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1959), p. 80.

2lbid.

 

     
      
  
   
    

'-'-'¢1115fl11§
.siusksb 0'

2;- “id“.J 6111‘
.. ml ..3. mm; ..2
i ~ atoll)”

3.1:. 3110:) ' ‘1

.. e L. 1'01.“ '

- . -‘ ‘ t. 1'91] -}
l

. l
- -‘1' 11.15.5115,

:. ml 9‘15‘,

‘3 . Yam as

7

'1
1; Icriirm'x’i. ,
.1 J.. 1‘;'1i')1i9,."'( ‘
'1 ltd-57mg,-

(-
n
1’}
5
p.-
G

i r.‘

gs
' ~4

 

346

To another church, composed largely of Gentile believers Paul had
once written:

For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. He is a Jew who
is one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart,
Spiritual and not literal. Rom 2:28, 29. RSV

This is the same argument Paul employs for the Philippians when
he declares: "For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the
Spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh. "
His argument is that Christianity is a matter of the heart, rather than
of the flesh, and that therefore the Judaizers are not to be heard. It is
the same emphasis as is found in the letter to the Galatians. He pro—
ceeds next to Show that if anyone had a right to boast of external ad-
vantages it was himself. Nevertheless, he has renounced all these and
trusts in Christ alone. This argument is intended as rebuttal to the
attack of the Judaizers upon his teaching and authority.

Though I myself have reason for confidence in the flesh also.

If any other man thinks he has reason for confidence in the

flesh, I have more: circumcised on the eighth day, of the people
of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew born of Hebrews;

as to the law a Pharisee, as to zeal a persecutor of the church,
as to righteousness under the law blameless. But whatever gain
I had, I counted as loss because Of the surpassing worth of know-
ing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss
of all things, and count them as refuse, in order that I may gain
Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness Of my own,
based on law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the
righteousness from God that depends on faith; that I may know him
and the power of his resurrection, and may share his Sufferings,
becoming like him in his death, that if possible I may attain the
resurrection from the dead. 3:4-11 RSV

In this eloquent survey of his past status and present hOpes, Paul
reveals that he stands on higher ground than even his Judai zing Opponents
if the true ground of confidence was merely that of external advantage

as suggested by them.

Iv v“v-
I

   
  
  
     
  
     
  

. . ‘e r- 7,1 in 21';
J ..
. . .4 ' e " ‘ . ,1tnllif3 '1"

' ' L _“ 15.-111‘ \{v

...- . ' . c111,: 111.3“-

1 ' ' ‘ "1r

. .. -. . - - . . c . ' J-JJJ 5 ', -

. . r.

- ' , ; - _ ' 'r 1.3.".‘11/15jdgtgr
- ' .' ' . _ - ' _ . i 31.11011 1,;

. , N

-v . .' ‘ ' . ‘ .u-on. my; 3

.. ' _ ' . ' .1 f: "3' 'v‘ .., ,Izgnilfl

. l ‘ '- L .. 1" .. I , ‘7 :J :‘J :rm ,W .I 4.1

'-' jf‘.‘ ‘ g L" .. , S; '5 " .15. ahead;

.. . . . . . - - l
“'._'."!’. " " . L’. _ '-" ;'. '1“: .Lr' 155—VD .

$1311.. r‘r'r' ‘r'ljzif V". min ~17; '41. ._ .rrr '. '_ 7:1; 1:". "1 slinfiwfi :1

5283;71:7"5 {Sr-ii: :: If set; " c‘.:;* J .2‘: - o i;;';r '1 3:0 -

 

347

. . . they had assailed the Apostle; and he replies that he was
a better Jew than any of them, and his present attitude was no
jealous depreciation of a privilege which he did not possess.
He had been 'born in the purple.‘ He was an heir of the sacred
traditions, and had once been devoted to the Law; but he had
found in Christ a nobler righteousness, and recognised that
legal rites were in comparison naught but 'refuse. '1

This argument is somewhat parallel to the inference he has earlier
drawn from Christ's descent from glory to the Cross. He had there
pointed out that ChriSt Himself had chosen to renounce all outward glory
and honour and had chosen, rather, to display the inner graces of the
Spirit. Similarly, Paul has renounced his "rights" as a Pharisee, and
by the grace of God he has humbled himself to the position of a suppliant
pleading for. the righteousness of Christ to which he has no legal claim.
The Judaizers gloried in externals, but Paul suggests that such behaviour
is far afield from the spirit of true Christianity.

His argument now merges into a denial of the third charge of the
Judaizers-~that his gOSPel of salvation by faith led to laxity of conduct.
Paul asserts that the contrary is true, and that the Christian, like
the Olympian runner, strains every nerve to attain his objective. This
goal, according to the Apostle, is conformity to the likeness of Christ.

Not that I have already Obtained this or am already perfect; but
I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made
me his own. Brethren, I do not consider that I have made it my
own, but one thing I do, forgetting what lies behind and straining
forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the
prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. Let those of us
who are mature be thus minded. 3: 12-15 RSV

He is careful to indicate the motivation of his striving. Not in
order to gain acceptance with God, but because Christ has already made

him his own, is the reason given. Thus the distinction between his

 

'David Smith, p. 517.

348

theology and that of the Judaiz ers is indicated. They were committed
to an anxious course of religious works in order that they might
ultimately be acknowledge by God, but Paul's works are the deeds of

a son rejoicing in his father's love. To emphasize further that his
gosPel delivered believers from sinful habits, the Apostle contrasts
the attitude of those who were practical antinomians with the behaviour
of those who served Christ.

Brethren, join in imitating me, and mark those who so live

as you have an example in us. For many, of whom I have often
told you and now tell you even with tears, live as enemies of the
cross of Christ. Their end is destruction, their god is the belly,
and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things.
But our commonwealth is in heaven, and from it we await a
Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ. . . . 3: 17-20 RSV

It is noticeable that throughout this letter the Apostle does not
engage in formal dialectics. That is, his arguments are never in
broadside fashion. They are gently expressed, incidentally almost,
in the midst of affectionate discourse. In strong contrast to the Galatian
church, this one has not been guilty of any majority dereliction. There-

fore, the strong polemical tone found in Galatians is absent in this case.

 

His endeavour is to convince through the counsels of affectionate
authority. 1 Logic is not absent, but its skeletal framework is girded
about with genial expressions of fraternal discourse. It is doubtful
whether more direct argmnentation would have been appr0priate or
profitable in the existing situation.

Before alluding once more to his theme of unity, Paul addresses
the Philippians with affectionate entreaty.

Therefore, my brethren, whom I love and long for, my joy and
crown, stand firm thus in the Lord, my beloved.

I entreat Euodia and I entreat Syntyche to agree in the
Lord. And I ask you also, true yokefellow, help these women,

 

1This aspect is further discussed under Ethos.

 

.Lfl

- r. 113 In .

' s

1. :mih

1.»
m.
Ll.
....
r

  

 

349

for they have labored side by side with me in the gOSpel together
with Clement and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names
are in the book of life. 4: 1-3 RSV

This is the final word regarding unity in this message, and it
particularly concerns two women of high character who at this time
were experiencing a disagreement. Apparently Euodia and Syntyche
had been Paul's helpers during critical times at Philippi. The word
here translated "labored" literally means "joined with me in my struggle. "
Now, by dissension they were on the verge of breaking down what they
had laboured to build up. All that Paul has already said concerning unity
was probably meant for them particularly. With great tact he has not,
however, referred to them by name until the last. Paul asks a fellow,
worker whom he calls "true yokefellow" to help these church ladies to
come to unanimity once more. Some have suggested that Luke may
have been this "yokefellow, " but there is no certain way of ascertaining
his identity.

To reinforce his admonitions regarding the spirit of harmony,

Paul reminds the church that believers should ever live as on the verge
of the return of Christ. Such an anticipation would foster the Spirit of
forbearance so vital in the avoidance of personal conflicts.

Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. Let all
men know your forbearance. The Lord is at hand. 4:4, 5 RSV

If affronts or difficulties seemed too difficult to meet with an
attitude of forbearance, another remedy lay at hand. Paul urges the
Philippians to have frequent recourse to prayer.

Have no anxiety about anything, but in everything by prayer

and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made

known to God. And the peace of God, which passes all under-

standing, will keep your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.
4:6, 7 RSV

. .
'ha'.

swm’l

.JQH .

'1 odd at,
’1 ”(tan

t
J

l.,

1115:

- d m! o
Jul-£152.“.

.1-l:.§

cud a,

a...

.I 7J1.'.-‘. 1 .115 ’gJitlll.ho‘l\Il,

. liii.... 719. 10

. ...
. ... . “5...... i (W.
4.5.21 F 161.. J
‘0._I.CW\14‘IV*1{§
1“ L'

l.
a...
1-1..3- .

J {"|\ 1)"

Jill- l 1111 ll A

‘n‘iiv on

 

'73 n1 6:) ,

    
 
   

   

tum. f . , . «in...
0. .o _ .0. _ ...
... .3 a ,
v 8 e, d. m .
f. i 5 f O m . 1 l a
.. ,. I v w. n . .
M ... R. 5 .1 1. r. .1 ,7
I; f c. ’t. a [I
I v .rd 1
.r. . .. Vs ....
H a e . . 5
. t ... J 5
.... .nJ. 1.. .fh
a . C H.

350

. 'The word translated ”keep" means ”to guard as witha garrison. "
In view of Paul's own spirit of rejoicing though a Roman prisoner under
Nero, this suggestion has peculiar power. He would have these be- '
, lievers know that however many of life' s difficulties might threaten to
destroy their peace, the consolations and resources of Christian faith
were adequate. Possibly the implication is that even the minor dis-
sensions of the church should be met in this way.

Before extending his gratitude for the gift from Philippi, the
Apostle addresses to his auditors a comprehensive admonition calculated
to establish in them the graces and virtues of which he has previously
spoken. Apparently a believer in "the expulsive power of a new
affection" Paul apparently hoped that positive concern with lofty themes
would banish all traces of disunity from the ranks of the worshippers at
Philippi. .

Finally, brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honorable,
whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever
is gracious, if there is anyexcellence, if there is anything
worthy of praise, think about these things. What you have i
learned and received and heard and seen in me, do; and the God
of peace will be with you. 4:8, 9 RSV '

The admonition not only suggests trains of thought but intimates that
these will lead to action. ”Think about these things. " "What you have

learned . . . do."

Subsidiary Theme

 

We turn now to the subsidiary theme of the discourse. As previous-
ly mentioned, the Philippians had been sorrowful concerning Paul's
estate, and also over the condition of Epaphroditus. The use of the words
”joy" and ”rejoice" almost a score of times indicates that the Apostle's

subsidiary theme was ”rejoice in all circumstances. " Thus closely

...- '..

   
 

'1". 'w-V
Fli-

 

W

    
  
    
  

‘. L1,: ‘:'1,:”.’:3 b1 .

. .0
.‘J

~. . (1'11! ”,3.

2 ' Slangm - ,"

.r
J 1*. 1.6111 ‘ '.

- i ,5. :Jfaff'lh"'i1
. " . .aar, ...
|
r .' -rT-' em»
'
:ffifu 91" .
- ‘_
"rune-15b
_ c . 013 {:1 - .- ~
_ e _ ‘\ u;1.qqA ,7
‘ Vt
._ “., -. J! ZLIFEQ‘v-
- ‘J ”1". x“: . J
_ ; x x. 1.1-'.“ ‘Y1
. , JV :2 :ov’
- - - . .J.J.J~ge,-..-
‘; .lI‘J (J in Y
. g _ - Ill
'r
'. ‘gJ Q1 _ 133
cc - J 'rl‘iliri 811.
i. a.-. .LVO a
- e . . .* fr "so
" '. -..; $5.2" air/1'5..-~
s‘.
. .-.

351

linked with the final admonition regarding unity is the apostolic man-

date "have no anxiety about anything." 4:6 RSV

Following Paul's greeting at the opening of the letter appears his

declaration that his imprisonment has become a cause of rejoicing

rather than sorrow.

I want you to know, brethren, that what has happened to me

has really served to advance the gospel, so that it has become
known throughout the whole praetorian guard and to all the rest
that my imprisonment is for Christ; and most of the brethren
have been made confident in the Lord because of my imprison-
ment, and are much more bold to speak the word of God without
fear. Some indeed preach Christ from envy and rivalry, but
others from good will. The latter do it out of love, knowing that
I am put here for the defense of the gosPel; the former proclaim
Christ out of partisanship, not sincerely but thinking to afflict
me in my imprisonment. What then? Only that in every way,
whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed; and in
that I rejoice. Yes, and I shall rejoice. For I know that through
your prayers and the help of the Spirit of Jesus Christ this will
turn out for my deliverance. . . . 1:12-19 RSV

The Philippians had feared that Paul's imprisonment would cur-

tail the work of evangelising the world. ”The reverse is the case" says

Paul .

They must not suppose, he tells them, that he is the Apostle

of a ruined cause, or that his imprisomnent is a sign that God' 5
frown is on his work, and that it is coming to naught; on the
contrary, he wants them to recognise that his misfortunes have
been overruled by God to the direct furtherance of the GOSpel.
The necessity of his being coupled to guardsman after guardsman,
day after day and night after night, had resulted in the notoriety
of his condition as a prisoner for Christ among all the Praetorian
cohorts, and to everybOdy else; and the majority of the brethren
had been stimulated by his bonds to a divine confidence, which
had shown itself in a yet more courageous daring than before in
preaching the word of God. 1

 

lFarrar, St. Paul, p. 597.

   
    
      
 
  

'f'. ..(Jr‘Je '
,; 'J.: J [wen-J f
. § .
. .i'rf. no a} ..
“ 2d , '
‘LJU‘I'XO -.'.
wince ‘ '
, -. ,y
t r; ‘(BL'V .4;-
f‘ '.J1 :1! znbm 5.,"
‘... . _ '3‘ '
'L.; 1.2 (J [Jun ... .'
‘ 5;:Itlu1rxita‘1‘. .’J.
.‘. 7.7.1583: ‘

  

352

Those referred to as preaching Christ "from envy and rivalry" were
probably Judaizers who took the opportunity of Paul's being out of
the way to advance their peculiar brand of Christianity. DeSpite this,
I rejoice, affirms the Apostle. Had he not written to another church
years before that "_a_§l_l_things work together for good for them that love
Christ"? Rom 8:28

The implication of these verses is that if Paul found occasion for
rejoicing in his condition, the Philippians in their freedom should be
even more joyous. Furthermore, they need not sorrow regarding the
work of the gOSpel, for it was being advanced by the very measures that
had threatened to curtail it.

The thought is extended in the next chapter.

Even if I am to be poured as a libation upon the sacrificial

offering of your faith, I am glad and rejoice with you all.

Likewise you also should be glad and rejoice with me.
Z:17,18 RSV

As libations of wine were often poured upon sacrificial offerings,
so his blood might be shed as the libation over the sacrificial and faith-
ful behaviour of the Philippians, says the Apostle. But in that case,
even in the event of martyrdom, he declares he will be glad and rejoice.
The metaphor is somewhat striking in that it not only indicates his
approaching execution but also the manner of it. Had he been burned or
crucified as many of the early Christians were, this figure would not
have been as appropriate. But when one considers the effusion of blood
that is associated with decapitation, it is evident how fitting is this
particular metaphor. He does not say why the possibility of such an
event should be a cause for rejoicing. Either he longed for the rest
which he believed Would usher him into the presence of Christ, or he
assumed that "the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church. ”

A related passage is found in the first chapter.

.t “H
.J -
.1'

v '.‘

 

 

J 3.1!.st

353

. . . it is my eager expectation and hOpe that I shall not be
at all ashamed, but that with full courage now as always
Christ will be honored in my body, whether by life or by
death. For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.
1:20,21 RSV

It would seem that Paul was making sure that not even his death,
should it transpire, would be a cause of lasting sorrow to the Philippians.
Even death is gain to the Christian, he asserts, and therefore rejoice,

rejoice in ALL things. His thought is similar to one expressed earlier
in the Thessalonians. "Rejoice always . . . give thanks in all circum-
stances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you. ” 1 Thess
5:16, 18 RSV It is quite evidently Paul's philosoPhy that God is the
one great Circumstance and that all events are either initiated or per-
mitted by His will for the benefit of believers. In this letter he endeavours
to pass on to the church at Philippi the same conviction. Thus in these
first two chapters he has pointed out that his imprisonment, the partisan
preaching of envious Judaizers, and even the threat of execution, caused
him to rejoice. Bengel has declared that four words sum up this letter.

:11

They are "I rejoice, rejoice ye. These very words are found in Paul's

comment regarding his possible martyrdom in 2:17, 18.
This same note recurs in the next two chapters.
Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord. 3:1 RSV

. . . our commonwealth is in heaven, and from it we await a
Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will change our lowly body
to be like his glorious body, by the power which enables him
even to subject all things to himself.

Therefore, my brethren, whom I love and long for, my

joy and crown, stand firm thus in the Lord, my beloved.
3:20--4: l RSV

Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. . . .
Have no anxiety about anything, but in everything by prayer
and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made

 

1Bengel, cited by Angus, p. 720.

,s:;=anc§‘

‘11P”_

J
' L

"v!.

L

1

Izuw

1

at

'J.
.1

f
‘v

,eznlexaf‘

  

 

354

known to God. And the peace of God, which passes all under-
standing, will keep your hearts and your minds in Christ
Jesus. 4:4,6,7

In’these passages, the Apostle mentions several reasons for the
spirit of rejoicing. He refers to the heavenly citizenship which belonged
to the believers, and announces the surety of the return of Christ. In
that great day, he declares, these weak and often pain—racked bodies
of ours will be changed into bodies that are incorruptible. Here and
now it is the privilege of every Christian to commit every anxiety to
the Lord in prayer, and to experience the guardianship of the divine
peace. Because of these things, says Paul, rejoice in the Lord.

It is noticeable that he does not suggest that the things of this
world are to be rejoiced over in their own right. Twice in these chapters
he attaches to the verb "rejoice" the phrase "in the Lord. " It is upon
the Giver, rather than His gifts, that he apparently endeavors to focus
the attention of his auditors.

There is little by way of closely reasoned argument in these
passages because, judging from the tone of the entire epistle, the
Philippians required reminding of old truths rather than persuasion
concerning new ones. Nevertheless, the strength and range of the
Apostle's ideas remain impressive for many, even today. In this letter
the philosophical concepts are both transcendent and pragmatic, a rare
combination in phiIOSOphy. They are transcendent because they soar
beyond what 'can be immediately verified by the senses, they appeal to
supernatural realities which cannot be measured or confined. The
idea of rejoicing in ALL circumstances, even in the face of death, is
typical of these concepts. Yet, as applied to the Apostle, these same
concepts become pragmatic in application. They have a most practical

bearing upon every-day issues. The Apostle soars high in describing

 

 

 

 

 

355

the glory and subsequent humiliation of Christ, but he does so in order
that church officers and laity might learn to dwell in loving unity.

He urges persecuted and harried Christians to "rejoice in the Lord”
in order that their daily Christian witness might not be impaired by
the Spirit of depression.

This linking ofthe theoretical and the practical characterizes
every discourse of Paul's. He lived in both hemisPheres of existence,
and this is not the least aSpect of his greatness. In the final use of
the word ”rejoice" in this epistle we have another example of this
characteristic of the Apostle.

I rejoice in the Lord greatly that now at length you have revived
your concern for me; you were indeed concerned for me, but
you had no Opportunity. Not that I complain of want; for I have
learned, in whatever state I am, to be content. I know how to
be abased, and I know how to abound; in any and all circum-
stances I have learned the secret of facing plenty and hunger,
abundance and want. I can do all things in him who strengthens
me.

Yet it was kind of you to share my trouble. And you
Philippians yourselves know that in the beginning of the gOSpel,
when I left Macedonia, no church entered into partnership with-
me in giving and receiving except you only; for even in Thessalonica
you sent me help once and again. Not that I seek the gift; but I seek
the fruit which increases to your credit. I have received full pay-
ment, and more; I am filled, having received from Epaphroditus
the gifts you sent, a fragrant offering, a sacrifice acceptable and
pleasing to God. And my God will supply every need of yours '
according to his riches in glory in Christ Jesus. To our God and
Father be glory for ever and ever. AInen. 4: 10-20 RSV

Here the Apostle travels in brief compass from a "thank you" for
a gift, to a doxology. On the way he intermingles memories of the past

with philosoPhical counsels for present living.

      
  
  
   
   
   
    
 
   

I 7' " J.,_- ' uuudxm ‘
J "'t-r 1‘va
-. . .' .:.J;:n.'.-03 -
.-. '_" 11mm '1’ I,-
“ «.1 ab 3'

'\
~ . -- miwzu »

v . - -J‘JJJPn
J K a - .U

 

- .
.W". -1

J J J‘ Y.‘fl!’-'

‘V‘ ‘ ' " Li (L9 ?—§.
,Ifiaufl .

» 7‘ e »- 'eJ/wilaom
— v , ‘1. 0:!“ :‘I 1;.

y»

32 it I .f

- i ..c .. . . gnivfig _
_ . Ly? :mjng,_IJ

. ; -' c . '. ti". [II-II. .j '_
.. J y.

— -. '4 ‘Jbflfiw

' a

- ‘ ,. J ,; gr no? a .. ,‘

A.
. r" a: J.
. a,

,

. - .'._ 1038......
V~ . . vsnlgafl:
".~':~.,.;' 7. ‘ - .' .: c.43'J1rJq‘A d. .
-113 .. 9(ngon

gt . ‘ __ 1'. ;.,F'u'—O 1.53.]:‘I.’
‘v ..

356

Analysis of Pathos

 

The circumstances surrounding the dictation of this address
suggest the probable nature of the pathetic proof inherent in the message.
To the recipients Paul seemed to be but a step away from martyrdom.
Chained to a Roman soldier by day and night, the Apostle was waiting
for the order to appear before Nero. Some scholars believe that at the
time of the writing of this epistle, Paul had been shifted from his hired
house to less comfortable quarters.

There is evidently an increase in the rigour of his imprisonment
implied now, as compared with the early stage of it, as described
in Acts 28; 0f 1:29, 30; 2:27. History furnishes a probable clue

to account for this increase of vigour. In the second year of

St. Paul's imprisonment (A.D. 62), Burrus, the Praetorian
Prefect, to whose custody he had been permitted (Acts 28:16,

"the captain of the guard"), died; and Nero the emperor having
divorced Octavia, and married Poppoea, a Jewish proselytess
(who then caused her rival, Octavia, to be murdered, and gloated
over the head of her victim), exalted Tigellinus, the chief promoter
of the marriage, a monster of wickedness, to the Praetorian
Prefecture. It was then he seems to have been removed from his
own house into the Praetorium, or barracks of the Praetorian
guards, attached to the palace, for stricter custody; and hence

he writes with less hOpeful anticipations as to the result of this
trial (ch 2:17; 3:11).1

This situation aroused the tender sympathies of the Philippians
as evidenced by their sending of the gift of money, and the messenger
Epaphroditus. Anxiously, they would wait for return word from the
imprisoned Apostle. He had been the founder of their church, and had
witnessed the baptism of many of them. Thus they counted him as their

Spiritual father. On Paul' 3 part also there was strong affection2 for the

 

lJamieson, Fausset and Brown, Commentary on the Whole Bible,
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, n. d. ), .pp. 359-360.

 

2It is recognized that the evidences here cited of Paul's goodwill
towards the Philippians constitute ethical proof. The discussion in this
section suggests that the same evidences are pathetic because they were
likely to stimulate a reSponse of love and sympathy and thus obedience.

 
    
  
     
  
     
  
     
   
   
     

:mrflh‘q -

o

- ._ I. _ ' a 11.3mm: 1.

- . . - ; ;- --, . - .i r .. ...ufrdc1'lq-.i.
f . c c c; , ’ .szme I
- ‘ . , ' l \I‘ . c' l " 14 $1 8‘

- I; . ' ..l J 11.7 '19fi- , ,

.
. -. ‘ ,- . . : .Jijnw

. o 'O

- - - . ‘;_-"‘l:19€£
, . _ . ... - ‘ 1.’ , '11: L,.-'."
. ' . ' c .' : _' :ch 83 V
- . . e . . .. 11111.00. .
“ i ' .J’ . . ). C .. .. : HUB“ U:
l . . . . c '. : ' 3 '350 ._._.‘
r. . - ~ - ,( v _ jr' .. ”injury“;
.. f5?) 3. y
.. ‘ , . v V , ‘ . , I ;. t "R‘- 1:5153 “v.
. L V , - -1 - ,( ’ ; .4. , SUI-0111‘ .1;
. 1 . e - _ 7 ,‘.. ll. '.J‘.hT~9
; -- - e- - --. 2 .I .u'Jlanfl'
l ' , .L.r‘. 4.. ..' '.J!fbflmlo~J
' at him .6:
. c - . .' .. e I. (.31 3031‘- h
J} ( $75515 I'L‘fi“
J- 133113qu1

" . f 1‘ . " c tisrlivd

> ' 1 c . L . '.: . " ' '13,:‘1rwhtru‘. q{'11

f’

   
 
        
   
 

,.

J
‘wan
-..an'
._ -
f
I
I
f
f
(
J

{..E.
<
I
l
.

"._ .,.i'
‘efl'e ‘ -:"

-¢ lvv-

1
1

, . . . ..-q
‘ t . 'i ;J: r v ; - --. c .01380

'. . .. . . v “ : . . ;.; \'; .L .‘zizlqsd?

.\
.‘
'9

; '. -..: :1 ' ' -'.., - " U!“ n!" .29

.9

.iI .— . C I. ‘ 7: J £7 . . ‘ '. 1‘ .1'.:"'.'-’.U.5F’1 ‘

3- -’i . I -°'J "."fd J." "L‘J’Ubidins

‘ no; :.';.v.r.:-:‘” .1 «.513 c' e 7 7;“: :. .Jtrz. $.11: mrl‘; berm
kmiaennai.’ ul‘ I; '1 r Jo i535. ::.::1'32 " a::::faq'~ -_
\(5d3 saunasd rijsrfsrfi are: 711-“; 5 ix: es. fa :JLJ 35d?" .,
'b-Iffizurfi PIE-Witch: :. 7; .1“ :vrl (Jim 1' (“if/l s g

 

 

  

4*.

357

members of the first church in Europe. He dictates his message with
the awareness-that he may never see them again. More than once this

church has remembered‘his needs when all others seemed to forget.

Thus:

The entire contents breathe an inmost and touching love for this
favorite church. No other letter is so rich in heartfelt express-
ions and tender allusions-~none so characteristically epistolatory,
without exact arrangement, without doctrinal discussions, without
Old Testament citations and dialectic argumentations. None is so
completely a letter of the heart, an outburst of passionate longing
for the fellowship of love amid outward desertion and affliction;

so that although at times almost elegiac in its tone, it is a model
of the union of tender love with apostolic dignity and boldness.l

The main pathetic emphasis in this discourse is upon the affections
and sentiments. Paul expresses his own affection with such apparent
sincerity that this revelation was likely to intensify the bonds of sympathy
already existing between him and his auditors. Certainly the major
purpose behind the address is to persuade the Philippians to do all in
their power to resist the threats of disunity, but this purpose never
stands out starkly. Each passage referring to the desirable nature of
church harmony is clothed about with phrases and clauses expressive of
fraternal love. . Probably this method was the most apposite to the
audience situation, and therefore calculated better to persuade than any
extended show of formal reasoning. Typical of Paul's manner in this
letter is the introduction which follows the greeting.

I thank my God in all my remembrance of you, always in every
prayer of mine for you all making my prayer with joy, thankful
for your partnership in the gospel from the first day until now.
And I am sure that he who began a good work in you will bring it
to completion at the day of Jesus Christ. It is right for me to
feel thus about you all, because I hold you in my heart, for you
are all partakers with me of grace, both in my imprisonment
and in the defense and confirmation of the gOSpel. For God is my
witness, how I yearn for you all with the affection of Christ Jesus.
1:3-8 RSV

 

 

 

lMeyer, quoted in Lange's Commentary, Vol. 22, p. 4.

 

4.4 ...—c.— - A

- —-~—.._.

- --‘s fl. 7...”._‘

..7 fl? “.7 ,SS .13); (Y: 33;.9 , ,-

‘.!||’ 3'7'.i 3‘”. ”J
-JJ31J13 Bug‘-

....LL. ‘blflb'I‘ A.

1
0

.,
. | '9
f 1'11an f.
' ”It: :3ij «1
LJ 4 (1" 1 I
; .1. int n;
I. 1:39.51? J'. J
- ‘ ...- ,5';|3qu ...r
11.1 $113 ‘
U
U. 113'.“ indip“ - 1
fun 9‘” .- 1.)“.
- . -J 4;. Lisa: 1"}J
, ~11 -‘
,' . ,.~.
313594 J- . -

.t .3

- 7J9.1-’
m; 35:13 .
"I

.... J-'u-.‘1[ijgixg-‘° '
- "J J; .' all: 511ch ~
.1 r

;".l';'..'_ rd 3; -.
...’

.v.r:vm:e:1'.‘.

at vnomi
.sM’ ‘:

l |

’3 ‘ 1131-151”: Q!1

o I,
7(1. 20‘ W l-aT. .
1:5 JUN ifmi '
L J“ meri
, : r im in h "
' sumac; a".
2'3 3f; fiche-jg"
' ' I’ Y JIIOCLB an :v .

 

358

Paul says that every memory he has concerning these Christians
is one that gives him cause to thank God. They have been partners
with him in the work of the gosPel from the very first. That is, they
have helped him by their persons, their money, and their prayers.
Because of this close partnership, Paul ever carries them in his heart,
and ”yearns" that their upright conduct may be maintained to the last.
In the last line he suggests that it is the love of Christ who dwells
within him that reaches out to the Philippians. Now he proceeds to
declare the nature of his prayers on their behalf.

And it is my prayer that your love may abound more and more,
with knowledge and all discernment, so that you may approve
what is excellent, and may be pure and blameless for the day of
Christ, filled with the fruits of righteousness which come through
Jesus Christ, to the glory and praise of God. 1:9-11 RSV

If we study carefully the Opening thanksgivings and prayers of

St. Paul's Epistles, we may note that he always thanks God for
what is strong in the Church to which he writes, and prays God
for the supply of that in which it is weak. Here he thanks God
for the characteristic enthusiasm and large-heartedness of the
Philippians; he prays for their advance in knowledge, perception,
judgment--the more intellectual and thoughtful side of the
Christian character--in which they, and perhaps the Macedonian
Churches generally, were less conspicuous. In the opposite case
of the Corinthian Church (see 1 Cor 1:4-10), he thanks God for
their richness in all utterance and all knowledge, but he bids
them "wait” for Him who shall "establish them as blameless, "
and exhorts them to unity and humility. 1

The discerning remark of this commentator gives us another clue
for Paul's preponderance of pathetic proof in this discourse, and for
the lack of that close argumentation which was present in his letter to
the Galatians. These Macedonian believers were simple-hearted people
comparatively unskilled in polemics, and Paul's approach to them

evidences his skill at audience adaptation. The one element that is

 

1Barry, Ellicott, Vol. '8, p. 67.

. .l‘ I
nun 3111” a, *‘

#1117 80

-‘J -('~"‘ ‘9‘" :

..-.J 1rd mill. 9
'

L: .111 can. i)
. 5'.
H.

z. . U313“ .9" ‘_ ~

. \

'.-‘ 1‘" 3" ’2 f"
.37 J ;' waif '.
-11. "£1 81‘ 7"»
~41; 118, 1

,M‘L: 1.? J O

..z. Y ”33 .. l
’ r. '!u :»'L 1.
I. L. r ”.38 $7..
. \i r "Jun Q 1?
L1 13!! 1111-0.“

, [1;1 i103,
' A'JOIU'I'J »
1 ":11va r ,
:II'J arrow” .1
.l .

 

359

never lacking from his presentation is the evidence of love which even
the unschooled can understand. In the reference to the return of the
Philippian messenger we have another example of the close sympathy
of the Apostle's.

I have thought it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus my
brother and fellow worker and fellow soldier, and your messenger
and minister to my need, for he has been longing for you all, and
has been distressed because you heard that he was ill. Indeed he
was ill, near to death. But God had mercy on him, and not only
on him but on me also, lest I should have sorrow upon sorrow.

I am the more eager to send him, therefore, that you may re-
joice at seeing him again, and that I may be less anxious. So re-
ceive him in the Lord with all joy; and honor such men, for he
nearly died for the work of Christ, risking his life to complete
your service to me. 2:25-30 RSV

The incidental words "on me also" in the statement "God had
mercy on him, and not only on him but on me also" are indicative of
the strong personal affection which was implicit in Paul. The sorrows
of his imprisonment, at first lightened by the arrival of Epaphroditus,
had later been intensified by the dangerous illness of the messenger.
For anything to have happened to Epaphroditus would have been to the
Apostle as "sorrow upon sorrow'*.'v 27. For the sake of the Philippians
and Epaphroditus himself, Paul has urged the latter to return that he
might be built up in health.

Concerning the clause "that I may be less anxious" one writer
has suggested: I

There is a peculiar pathos in this expression, as contrasted
with the completeness of joy described above in verses 7, 18.
Epaphroditus' recovery and safe return would take away the
"sorrow upon sorrow, " but the old sorrow of captivity, enforced
inactivity, and anxiety for the condition of the gOSpel, would re-
main. The expression of perfect joy belongs to the "spirit
which was willing" indeed; the hint of an un3poken sorrow marks
the weakness of the flesh. l

 

lBarry, Ellicott, Vol. 8, p. 79.

> ' - 1' "Jr‘m- «_.-

    

w

o.

 

, ;. ‘ - ..11' '_ L'b‘f 5 C3}

.J. -.Lgm ', ..~.-..E:aoqq;g

; ..x _. LfmzL‘lru‘CS o

" .l p.13; :1. .2 ‘,;rilll"r’/8

    
     
 
 
   
   
  
    
   
   
     
   
  

T" l»‘ v 1- " >iur ”(05%"

'. .7 3 ' ;- n." urn !d_
~ .‘ -. ‘ . 'icjz'bansflil;

.a'o h.

. . "“
‘_. . 1; . .131.;!V(rd3
- .Ll.‘n£ I’M-AL
- I i- i; .. .UJLZuun‘ -.
\ -' _. . L’.-‘lr ”Dad 4

r q. . ucv .111 :
_ ,_ e in! m ...
- (
- - - c: wad: .-._
. ' ' "oz. 1. J1: as

l -.v' u; (Lido ‘1'
~ _ ,'_ . 'r ;;. 1 ‘. .

.11.) vi ._‘ 7‘"

L
— ‘t .-r ~ LII/1:181 ‘p

..1 ‘wll‘i’laq.

c -. '. .‘ : g: 1.74:033 -:~
. n I

. c " ....I. aim; no ,

-‘ i 7 i L‘. VT! ()3 r...

. ‘ ‘ ‘ ~ wane" ..'
. -’ .f

' ‘ "f ,l g. ; it: ammo, '1.

. . .4", ifgfllu f
_1

.. ..'.:‘ , ., ‘ r. ‘ fl ' I
, > . - r.-. on.) ;,m

:,_ kn] I .. _ 1.195(L’l03. a.~~
_ ' . ' V."
; _.j ‘; .‘3 {'c I\ :14. 'alfll': ' I‘

“-3 - ‘/'..’..£..:r r. .' an L’
I
.. .3} .11: :o as, :

. , I
'7 ‘ V a u
.( .’ ‘. .. ‘ .3303; ...
6

 

360

The expression "risking his life" is a graphic one in the original
Greek. Literally it is "having staked his life” or "having gambled
with his life. " 'Possibly it infers that Epaphroditus had engaged in
strenuous exertions on behalf of the prisoner awaiting trial, to the
premeditated risk of his own life.

As he approaches his conclusion, the Apostle utters once more
a spontaneous burst of affection.

Therefore, my brethren, whom I love and long for, my joy
and crown, stand firm thus in the Lord, my beloved. 4:1 RSV

Here are five intimations of his love in a single sentence. It is signifi-
cant that these expressions are linked to the chief theme of the letter,
that these believers should “stand firm in the Lord. " Because they
were the beloved brethren of Paul, they were to strive not to disappoint
his hopes for them. Thus the motives aroused by Paul also constitute
logical advocacy. We would stress again what has been previously
mentioned, that with Paul the manifestations of logic, pathos, and

ethos are indissolubly welded into a single persuasive onslaught. It is
most unlikely that Paul ever consciously formed any substantial part

of his messages as an appeal to just one aSpect of the human personality.
He aimed at the whole man. 1

Similar to the preceding appeals to love, friendship, and respect,

is the recurring invitation to noble emulation found in this discourse.

 

lMany Speech teachers today stress the interrelationship of the
various aSpects of invention.

"A separate treatment of reasoning and motivation need not mean
that these categories are mutually exclusive. The old reason-emotion
dichotomy is psychologically unsound. In other words, thoughtful and
emotional reactions are interrelated and occur in varying prOportions in
different situations. If one supports the assertion that firearms must be
handled in a certain way by showing how persons may be injured or killed,
he is using an appeal which is at once logical and psychological. It is
clear that all behavior has its motives; therefore, an advocate who stimu—
lates certain desires and associates them with his prOposition is not
necessarily using illogical thinking. " Glen E. Mills, Composing the
Speech (New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc. , 1952), p. 193.

 

 

1' ‘
l ‘ ..u-‘~M—-

2.131 «5 I ‘30:. “IVY?“

We adv: 6353021135 as .e'

iammc 51.3
" .alm-d

‘ ‘-
l
. ,
,
i c , I -
.. .
c~ ‘
_ L, c-
I l '
- cl ... -
..1 ‘ ;- c. i
" .‘JA :. 7 _ ‘ M
'- : 23". _T”
.
6C J‘H ’ -."IL"_I.. - “(..
' " ' , ' 1 .r . .
,ben;.. 2" Csl'IIJ‘rll cu ”(f 1.

  
  
  

"1' £11588 »'-
- .- " I: v“

. . . ‘ .. V ..v NA 13 ‘-
.. ' . dial-1b.” ’
cl .- ruqfl .. ‘
. . _.. "(I B

, -' .- '1; ' ,wuia <
‘AIU’DID I

- i . ... ~ “1.1118va

1 ‘ 1. .: ..z; .-ooea

. ;. i "ova

c. J . “13:10:37-
-. F.

._ .. :- - t ((0530

‘ l
A
V
I - ~
. _r-
I\ .
- l -

.-tl ." - .
r .- r
.5 ' '
" _‘ L
I :
_U-‘A_~ ‘ ‘h-
.m. 1““.1...

.73. 1181': "

,(sagu ..or'I

A—._ -\- r'ufj' :11. aoixo',

  
  
   
    

-j' - ., 1',.';~J1:!E:!"-

‘ g -x{1(j!;.lc.?.aibfi£:
,‘ - n; ' 35:131;

‘; " - i' ' ill? 0’
c - ~: :.«:.;~.rrl gab :

fi' .; . ;:;‘ d.- asq?
.1 5;. ext}: 10 B a...
.“L‘. :51 L. I-I u."3£a]3 5,- ‘

_. r-lmf'o

361

Thus Paul in one place says: "Brethren, join in imitating me,
and mark those who so live as you have an example in us. ” 3:17 RSV
It is probably not the result of chance that in this letter where he
urges the Philippians to "rejoice whatever happens" he reveals that
he is doing this very thing. He declares, for example, that even his
imprisonment is working out for good, and asserts his belief that
even if martyrdom is to be his fate, that also will be made to minister
to the profit of the Church. Over and over again he refers to "his joy"
amid conditions which would discourage most men. I_-Ie is rejoicing

and would have them learn to do likewise.

 

The strongest appeal to emulation is found in the second chapter.

So if there is any encouragement in Christ, any incentive of love,
any participation in the Spirit, any affection and sympathy,
complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love,
being in full accord and of one mind. Do nothing from selfishness
or conceit, but in humility count others better than yourselves.
Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to
the interests of others. Have this mind among yourselves, which
you have in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God,
did not count equality with God a thing to be graSped, but emptied
himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness
of men. And being found in human form he humbled himself and
became obedient unto death, even death on a cross. Therefore
God hath highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name which
is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should
bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue
confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Therefore, my beloved . . . work out your own salvation
with fear and trembling. 2:1-12 RSV (emphasis ours)

 

 

In this passage there are appeals to emulation, religious tenets,
gratitude, friendship, social values, self-preservations, and altruism.

Emulation. C0py the example of the Christ who humbled Himself

 

to become man, to serve hmnanity, and to die on a cross, suggests

Paul .

V

C

£3,301: r:
1.11.,:k( (ill-...

11111;. ,

any: _:

I I
4.13.? £03

I.

L 51:}: :,_' ‘
“:3 i'lad
L ~.1;I_.13a ' ”1
if
it 01$,” 9

~‘ 4. ”1,389 “I"

(“A ::j

- 1
' r

. .. (sleazy.
r , T: fr. d: a"
- 3,1919 . j

'5’- Wu! .1 ‘
'I . 1

c if'llfig) 30‘! ..
L113 '1’"?!

 

362

Religious tenets. Belief in the Christian doctrines of the incar-

 

nation, and the atonement, is made a lever for Paul's task of persuasion.

Gratitude. The first few lines of this passage call for a response

 

of gratitude in view of the many benefits believers are receiving through
Christ.
Friendship. Paul appeals to the desire for friendship by suggest-

 

ing that true behavior will result in group behavior characterized by
unity, harmony and love, which can not but confer the benefits of friend-
ship upon every member of the group. When he calls them his "beloved, "
the Apostle appeals to the friendship that exists between them and him-
self as a motivating factor for good conduct.

Social values. The social values of unity and concord, of unselfish

 

service, are described in this passage; and the prOSpect of eternal
reward is alluded to in order to show the’ worthwhileness of adhering to
such values.

Self-preservation. The Philippians are reminded that Christ, who

 

gave up His life, had it restored to Him once more. He was exalted
and given a name "above every name. " It is implied that a similar
reward will be given to those who follow Christ' 3 example.

Altruism. The emphasis on self-forgetful service and humility

 

appeals to whatever is altruistic in man‘s nature.

Foremost among these appeals is the one to emulation. Paul had
already asserted that for him ”to live was Christ" 2:21. He anticipates
that with the Philippians also "Christ would be honoured always” 1:20.
Because He was the focal point of their hope and faith, there would be
no stronger appeal than to c0py the great Exemplar.

. . . in striving to urge on the Philippians the example of
humility and unselfishness as the only possible bases of unity,
he sets before them the Divine lowliness which had descended
step by step into the very abyss of degradation. He tells them
of Christ's eternal possession of the attributes of God; His

   
   
  
 
   
    
  
  
 

‘ .

" .17.}; ' ,‘rljbffO‘ " L
,?:.-1 unfit? .~ H .
. . . " , -[ . .
-... . -11 :0” “1:.
; L? 3. ' L‘i‘l (I... x,

4

Q

'7- " ‘ .fléljfibl .-‘

b

I

'1
o .
.

.

f

'l

O

l

c .' . " .A-JUd . '.r
|
,1 w vvrm...
L‘ u. ywvd‘ .

-;~.Z_ -1 - .. -. .acr'qs 9'
. ‘J
_ . .~::‘r'riiafl -.
1'
1 . urlnv

~ "10.: D,

; '- '. 3 ohm!!!)

- _vfrrrsi
31.1113 b? x

t ‘ I - I I;
. \. _chjrlqrf‘ ‘
i . r ’4. 51131519]

‘._".‘i ; :J'J' Lani ‘- «
1. r 1.131.:eth--.
1” . .

 

363

self-abnegation of any claim to that equality; His voluntary
exinanition of His glory; His assumption of the essential

attributes of a slave; His becoming a man in all external sem-
blance; His diSplay of obedience to His Father, even to death,

and not only death, but--which might well thrill the heart of

those who possessed the right of Roman citizenship, and were
therefore exempt from the possibility of so frightful a degradation--
death by crucifixion. Such were the elements of Christ's self-
abasement! Yet that self-humiliation had purchased its own

infinite reward. . . . Could they have a stronger incentive?1

In answer to the closing question of this quotation, we would say
that it is unlikely that Paul could have provided a stronger incentive to
right conduct than in this synopsis of Christ's condescension in man's
behalf.

In the same chapter Paul offers other examples of sacrificial
service. In this instance they are in the form of mortals like the
Philippians themselves, .and ones known personally to them. The
Apostle refers to his own example, and that of Timothy, as well as the
unselfish conduct of Epaphroditus, the Macedonian's own messenger.

Do all things without grumbling or questioning, that you may
be blameless and innocent. . . . so. that in the dayof Christ I
may be proud that I did not run in vain or labor in vain. Even
if I am to be poured as a libation upon the sacrificial offering
of your faith, I am glad and rejoice with you all, Likewise you
also should be glad and rejoice with me.

I hope in the Lord Jesus to send Timothy to you soon. . . .
Timothy' 8 worth you know, how as a son with a father he has
served with me in the gospel . . . I have thought it necessary
to send to you Epaphroditus my brother and fellow worker and
fellow soldier, and your messenger and minister to my need,

. . . So receive him in the Lord with all joy; and honor such
men, for he nearly died for the work of Christ, risking his life
to complete your service to me. 2:14-30 RSV

By glancing at the chapter, it can be easily seen that Paul's plea

to the Philippians to live in harmony, exhibiting ”blameless and innocent”

 

lFarrar, St. Paul, p. 600.

f- ",';.t .-' .J 86 . .
Jail“! '1.

  
    
    

' , 1'; "(11:0 U '
‘ U. ( (Il‘é 'T
;. ‘ ;,. U 076 l‘ ‘
. , . '(d
.- ' Juana
. _ _ , .31 93 -.
; 1.9." .'
:1 {.LJU
l ’IIEJ 340
_ .- nu 6K;
\ _.j: 1212:] 13”
‘ N -é..1n'.1fb .".'
l" ‘
‘ if, L13 ”2‘" ,
l
r- ; '1-‘lm 3‘
, 51510 .'
lrmzq‘ 6'
r,., 1
(TL .'
:u' ”111!)
i' a - s ‘
_ x , t
\ Mr .I a
\ L ‘ul
. U"! 03 , -.
.7 . 1.0315199
.r
; .elieo '

UV 1‘

 

364

lives, is wedged in between the citation of the condescension of Christ,
and the examples of the founders of the local church, and of Epaphroditus
its messenger. The pathetic appeal seems well adapted to the particular
audience which he addresses.

There is yet another aSpect to Paul' 3 use of pathos in this epistle.
Not only does he incite to good conduct by expression of his love for
them and by reference to the examples of Christ, his own life, Timothy,
and Epaphroditus, but he also seeks to appeal to the sentiments of joy

and hope. In the section on Logos we have considered the reasoning

 

employed by the Apostle in the endeavour to show that it is a Christian's
privilege to rejoice in all circumstances. He had pointed out that even
the most apparently discouraging situations such as his imprisonment
could work out so well as to cause rejoicing (1:12-20). Furthermore,

he had reminded them of their privileges in Christ, such as the privilege
of prayer, intended as a means of banishing all that would threaten the
Spirit of joyfulness (4:4-7). These arguments and examples are also
closely linked with the sentiment of hope. For example, in 1:19-20,
Paul links rejoicing with hOpe.

Yes, and I shall rejoice. For I know that through your prayers
and the help of the Spirit of Jesus Christ this will turn out for
my deliverance, as it is my eager expectation and hope that I
shall not be at all ashamed, but that with full courage now as
always Christ will be honored in my body, whether by life or by
death. RSV

These words indicate that Paul's own rejoicing is a result of the hOpe
he has in Christ that all will work out well, even the temporary sleep
of death.

Towards the close of the discourse the Apostle endeavours to
strengthen hOpe in his auditors by pointing them to their heavenly
inheritance, and the resurrection body to be theirs at the return of

Christ.

f1. ’1'; L -
'1‘3J_',\1r#,;,(q
.‘S
'L'fl ti'b
l I.
L {f 1:: a .

:4“. 1:99. "

~

~~ ~ -:t‘.’1 M:

“.11: o: .
- a 1;} [I ‘.
CAL Yd 3' .-
u .1' 0'1 (,3, ‘.
. v '
' l-QC‘S _,'_
I‘ :.
1 P. 3110 . ,
. 1.1. _ th'1..;
L: In} ,. .
, II
'~.L' N..;J_\
biota-g, ...

1' 1 I "'55":
Mod a _,
.‘~ w'rwvi =

’
.‘J. ad in”
'y‘lll.
J alflhxhnj.“ .

1: $13113 38 _ ..‘.

4
13'

,_t..
a i I. - uh
l

. - o ’
'. J 1'; $1.1! Ht 4.1--

 

365

But our commonwealth is in heaven, and from it we await a
Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will change our lowly body
to be like his glorious body, by the power which enables him
even to subject all things to himself. . . . Rejoice in the Lord
always; again I will say Rejoice. Let all men know your for-
bearance. The Lord is at hand. 3:20-4z5 RSV

In summary we could say that the pathetic appeal of this discourse
is made chiefly to the affections and sentiments, with particular empha-
sis upon emulation and religious feelings such as joy and hope. While
it is extremely doubtful that pathos of this nature would succeed with
any audience composed of present crosscurrents of society, it seems
likely that such overtones and appeals were most appr0priate for an

audience like that of the Philippian Christians in A. D. 62.

Analysis of Ethos

 

A study of this discourse suggests that it is the underlying stratum
of ethical appeal which gives weight and power tothe whole. There is
little formal argument, and much of the pathetic appeal is made through
the revelation of Paul‘s own good-will in such a way as probably to stir
up a similar reSponse in his hearers. Aristotle, long before Paul,
affirmed that "we might almost affirm that the speaker's character is
the most potent of all the means to persuasion. " Paul's previous

reputation constitutes a large part of the ethical appeal in Philippians.

 

In its original sense, ethos meant the impressions of character,
intelligence, and good will which the listeners received during
the Speaker's performance. According to this view, an orator
was defined as "a good man skilled in Speaking. " Nowadays the
concept includes not only what the Speaker does in the presence
of the audience but also what the listeners have heard about him
before the occasion. In other words, the Speaker's reputation
and position in society influence the listener's judgments. 1

 

1141113, p. 313.

 

. m a ... h .
. . . u‘
.n .. . I
9 ”‘1 On Y ta 3
x .u .. a 1
ll ( . 3 . (
. .U I. l . L f ..
r; . .. .ys .... 1 q . ... r 4.
l . . .. . v1 .L L .. L ., h.
.L l . 4 . L . v .. _ .1
k .. i a . P L
. . ... Io
y _
.. 1w . . e
L c w c
f. r .
’4. l.- .
_ l \
. y k

a . . ,. H
1 ha . . M
...w .1
...: n ...... .
.M .L. ..z. 5
r. 5 . ".4
. I
.U u.
. J
L

 

366

The "intelligence" of the Apostle is suggested in this discourse
by the manner in which he chose to accomplish his purpose of per-
suasion. Adapting his materials to his audience, Paul skillfully chose
to motivate by well-chosen examples and by religious appeals rather
than by close and extended argument. The prolonged reasoning so
common in the letter to the Corinthians who prided themselves on their
intellectuality is absent in this message to a less sephisticated pe0p1e.

' We have already observed the many evidences of Paul' 5 love for
his listeners. In chapter one he declared that every remembrance of
them caused him to praise God, that he held them "in his heart. " In
chapter two they are called his ”beloved, " and the Apostle asserts
that he thinks so much of them that if his martyrdom ensued he would
consider it but an appr0pri‘ate libation over the sacrifical offering of
their faithful conduct. The following chapter reveals his affection by
his fatherly warnings concerning problems in their pathway. Typical
of the fourth and last chapter is the first verse: ”Therefore, my
brethren, whom I love and long for, my joy and crown, stand firm thus
in the Lord, my beloved. " From first to last, the letter breathes the
atmosphere of affection.

The most outstanding feature of the ethical appeal of Philippians

 

is its revelation of the lofty character of Paul. That a man on the
verge of death could be so selfless as to pour out his soul on behalf

of others is an impressive revelation. An extended quotation from one
of the greatest of Pauline scholars indicates the forcefulness of this
phase of ethical appeal in the present letter. Farrar contrasts Paul
with some other ancient worthies in similar positions.

When Paul and Silas lay in the deepest dungeons of Philippi,
scored and bleeding from the flagellation which the local
”Praetors" had inflicted upon them in the forum, they had
sung songs in the night. Another song now emanates from the
Apostle's Roman prison. His letter is like one of those

-1.-

'V

. b"
‘3,“ l _ ".—'

,1 win-raw
"Z.’ in!!!)
‘llfl’i - "

‘5ch 1(1‘3

5:31.": k) .- 1‘

"duo in o-

- I
" in no

“[1109

.3. ., z, '10!"th

tins.- 10

“Arr; firs-1‘13 ' 3

5.12; (1101-1 :Jgjfjrgpfg '. .: " .' .v': :1 if“ (I!

Lamij in err. 551.2} ' ' 4 ‘ ‘ '-: : ' nsmqg

 

367

magnificent pieces of music which, amid all its stormy fugues

and mighty discords, is dominated by some inner note of

triumph which at last bursts forth into irresistible and glorious
victory. It is new and marvellous. What was there thus to fill

the soul and flood the utterance of St. Paul with joy? The letter
was dictated by a worn and fettered Jew, the victim of gross
perjury, and the prey of contending enmities; dictated by a man

of feeble frame, in afflicted circumstances, vexedwith hundreds

of opponents, and with scarce one friend to give him consolation.
Could any one have been embittered with deeper wrongs, or tor-
mented by deadlier sufferings ? Before we look upon this serene
cheerfulness, this unmurmuring resignation of St. Paul as a
”matter of course, compare him for a moment with others whose
circumstances were a thousandfold less pitiable than his. . . .
Cicero was, for a short time, exiled. His exile had every
mitigation. He was not imprisoned. He could choose his own home.
He was surrounded wherever he went with wealth, luxury, adInir-
ation, troops of friends. He knew that the great and the powerful
were using all their influence on his behalf. And yet, though he
claimed to be a philosopher, though he had published whole volumes
of lofty exhortation, there is scarcely one of the many letters which
he wrote during that short exile which is not full of unmanly

lam entati on s .

Take another instance. Seneca was a contemporary of
St Paul; he may even have seen him. He was a man of immense
wealth, of high rank, of great reputation; a man who wrote books
full of the most sounding professions of Stoic endurance and Stoic
superiority to passion and to pain. He too was, for a short time,
exiled to Sardinia. He too was free, and rich, and he had power-
ful friends. How did he bear his exile? He too broke into abject
complaints, and in Spite of his Stoicism was not ashamed to grovel
with extravagant flatteries at the feet of a worthless freedman, to
induce him to procure his return. . . .

We might take other instances. We might compare St. Paul
in exile with Clarendon, or Atterbury, or Bolingbroke. His lot
was incomparably worse than theirs, for he was not only an exile,
he was cold and hungry, and a prisoner and lonely, and suffering
and distressed by the constant machinations of bitter opponents,
and with the sword of the headsman hanging, as it were, by a
thread over his neck. Yet his magnanimity stands out in bright
contrast with even the best and greatest of these. He does not,
like Cicero, weary his friends with complaints and importunities.
He does not, like Dante, yield to a brooding melancholy. No such

done on

 

"7'. V

15 , , .rv . S Li! 31's
’ l
1 fl _. ‘ . -; . '. «if! ‘(i’ln‘
__ _, . ' 1!"; l ’u‘ l
_ , _ ‘\

.Lll'h’
-‘ ' - J o
_ - c " 'cIJ ,

1 ' “I. J
\
-.. ‘5- 93:33;

..A

1’; - _. 'r‘ , '
. . _ x,
, . .-. .ISI- 1 -‘
; , .1111. "HI 4..
- -- - a" (L5 "A!
. '1
- I- - v. . vial-1U“
. ,- y 1.. .15 K...
r’,.
- - ' .‘JPUI ‘{
j .. ‘ _ ‘7..I. .1-
~ _ g .. . Ila-L: 1f

. l1". LBW“
_ W _ ‘.rxl.v'13.lu, ‘
g~ . tin” a, ._
. ~ 1 ~ ' " '..' $135131
‘ . ‘x g ; ‘. j I :1 .. h | 11325 W
'1 . _ . u thI"
. . '13s:

g ,1 a“ ‘ {H‘lGT 4" J
. -« ‘ , all ,lu-l, 7-
, 7 g '3. 1'. lo I

til’

'.

., ,, .5113 4‘,
' . J 1(31102

.,‘.
‘v
‘J

-..r .03

-. i / . .akln'
‘ “f1 ( ‘hj -‘ “‘

\_3. -- - ._ - 1;-..mcvn‘1m'

1: mid

> ‘0
. . nial'v‘
.— . r‘gw “ '-
, .t . c . Yu-..5f; 4.0.,
.- “(~ ~ ; 1' , g; s Moo-
--- L .. -.-‘(L '5829«
5' . ' c , - -; 5m; - 7
-9 ' ‘ \'
5 ‘5.

. fill '16 p
:.’.L'.' tn: .3. /5. 1131'
-.‘wm’ 1'. ’ ii ; "

.V(£rv.r{<n£ tr.“ 1 ’ ”

 

  
      
  
   
  
 
 
    
  
  
   
 
   

368

gloom comes over him as that which fell on our own great exiles.
Yet he was more guiltless than any of these, and his sufferings
were infinitely more unmerited. Amid poverty and imprison-
ment, with the frown of the tyrant bent on him, death seeming to
stare him in the face, the fundamental note in the many-toned
music of his letter is the note of joy.1

Even in the smallest of matters the ethical appeal of the Apostle is
evident. For example in the first verse we read: ”Paul and Timotheus,
the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus. . . . "
This is the only occasion where Paul does not attach to the introductory
use of his name some title of apostolic authority. His attitude is that
of confident familiarity and he calls himself and Timotheus ”servants. "
It is as though he were saying ”There is no need for me assert my
apostleship to 192. " Possibly also he does this "in order to be able to
join himself and his young fellow-worker under a common title. "2
The courtesy of Paul in linking with his own name in the address that of
Timothy, who had helped him in the founding of the Philippian church,
is apparent. The delicacy of this salutation is typical of the tone through-
out the epistle.

As we consider the character of Paul as revealed in this discourse
we are reminded of the oft repeated advice of rhetorical theorists that
cultivation of the moral qualities is a primary duty of the public Speaker.

The letter is more distinctively personal than any of the epistles

to the churches except 2 Corinthians. In this lies largely its
peculiar fascination. But the personality is accentuated on a
different side. Its sensitive, indignant, self-vindicatory aSpect,
so marked in the Corinthian letter, is completely in the background
here. The Paul of the Philippian letter is not the man whose
apostolic credentials have been challenged, and whose personal
motives have been impugned; not the Vindicator of himself and of
his ministry against the pretensions of false apostles; not the

 

1Farrar, Messages, pp. 303-305.
zGodet, p. 498.

 

I
‘,.

 

. «kw/fuss} 1316

:15 e ast 94-11.
“_..... .

   
   
   
    
  
   
  
   
  
   
   
     
  
  

. L..." Lamb , .J‘
1.1» 1:: am
vfelin‘ - I
gill: (131M, ,3:
..._ L1,; 1 {gm

--:‘;:-.: um lo ->' -

.‘.

 

.5 '
..lrlurrm -e~
"
1 13 301fi*

' 1F c' It 8'-}\
- . yhm '3 ,
~ ' that.“ 1
\L' “. «:1
o - er.rhun>}i
-""{qu ...
. “S
Y HI- “0,
;,,-1.Y3‘
_ A
‘vY‘rw!(;flu H
‘A .
'L idT‘ . -4
. I
,o{“; 5'
:. lanoo -_
, 4 .
it ;( "56”,," ,‘I.
.C’ - {.1 ed? ‘7
. WV
1 ~‘.‘.[ ‘19 l .r

7
L 77.51.31wa '

Alix-la "
1.11;) {:1 5:31;

lhflq adT_~>
l.» ems-.9 a)“

t.,“'

REG?" .‘,~..

369

missionary who is reluctantly constrained in his own defense

to unfold the record of his labors and sufferings. He is the dis-
ciple who counts all things but loss for the excellency of the
knowledge of Christ Jesus his Lord; for whom to live is Christ,
and to die is to be with Christ. . . . With an experience behind
him unique in its depth and richness and variety, with the memory
of personal vision of Christ and of ravishment into the third
heaven, with a profound knowledge of the mysteries of divine
truth won through heart- shaking moral crises, in solitary medi-
tation and in the vast experience of his missionary career, --his
attainment is only_a point for a larger outlook, an impulse to
more vigorous striving. In Christ he is in a sphere of infinite
possibilities, and he counts not himself to have apprehended, but
stretches forward under the perpetual stress of his heavenward
calling. 1

Such passages as the following in Philippians are indicative of the
letter's revelation of the character of Paul, and each terse statement
suggests a world of meaning.

For me to live is Christ. . . . 1:21 RSV

Even if I am to be poured as a libation upon the sacrifical offer-
ing of your faith, I am glad and rejoice with you all. 2:17 RSV

. . . w‘hatever gain I had, Icounted as loss. for the sake of
Christ. Indeed I count everything as loss because of the surpass-
ing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have
suffered the loss of all things, and count them as refuse, in order
that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteous-
ness of my own, based on law, but that which is through faith in
Christ. . . that I may know him and the power of his resurrection,
and may share his sufferings. . . . 3:7-10 RSV

Not that I have already obtained this or amalready perfect; but

I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me
his own. Brethren, I do not consider that I have made it my own;
but one thing I do, forgetting what lies behind and straining for-
ward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize
of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. 3: 12-14'RSV

These remarks could not but remind the Philippians of the Paul

of ten years before who had sung in the city' 3 dungeon and. saved its

 

lMarvin R. Vincent, Philippians and Philemon, of The Inter-
national Critical Commentar] (Edinburgh, 1950), p. xxxvi.

 

 

\I
‘
x I.
- I v r} '
x -
.71 \ -
U? St _. -,

II. I; iviibfii-
v ‘ _,

      
   
  

" I «j the Hi nth. v! ~
. . y
I . p I Y. Lu {If} r'v‘
I I I l ‘l " It) ‘ Jumplu (I l ‘1’
r ; ‘. “r ... U i( D '5,

I .‘i 1.. :‘Up '“H

. . fcno' ,7
v ‘ I

I I ' '=.1L'-" . --

I aL'J nuwv 1~ .

'I ‘ E 12:15

,3 Job! ‘-
. “533'? "
-I mum.

_ \
I I I I ’ > ‘li'vcdtl -,_
. v .
1. A
7. 2'." Li: I; 3, -
, I I I , ~ .3119“; '
L -f
. V
I ' ' I i
1‘ c 5 k .‘T , ..JIEJ. 11101;.
I. . I event
- v v . I:
\
. v) V - I .t . ,
‘l.l 7 ‘ . If lath bb- '
I I :‘ I it}; Y1»: . ‘
‘ ‘I ' (_I Yr” 0 l
1 _ 7 ‘: .Lliu _
,- . . z r. 'v f $113119 q
n- I~
\

-I', -I , v .4; .crr~(.)n..-."'

I ~ ,x ‘9. nits/1&1. ,"
I 1 3; .r u I 301:8 «
.I r 4 . . : , 3: i.‘ 'éil 3 ‘-
.'I ; 3r - .J.’ MM '0‘:
I LI I - .L/ r ' '

 

 

7 019 I 511T 10 wt {115-Tiff“

.q {(0an .ur ,

I. L”: Iricdn

 
  
 

’-
r I: a'm‘ZLQL riff." ,i’LSrznlv.

 

-7 .l
.mmf‘v“ ) visinsmmru

370

jailor from suicide. To have resisted the appeal of such a man would
have been hardly possible for those who already had been persuaded by
him to revolutionise their way of life. Paul's inducements to unity
and godly living are but the materials constituting a gem-box wherein
resides the jewel of his own character. Many would declare the

extravagance warranted if we declared that such a revelation of ethos

 

is almost without parallel.

Analysis of Arrangement

 

This discourse follows to some degree the typical format of a
Pauline epistolatory address. It contains the usual greeting, thanks-
giving, benediction, and farewell. The body of the letter, however,
consists of practical exhortations interspersed with doctrinal allusions,
which procedure stands in contrast to Paul's usual presentation of a
separate and prior doctrinal section.

What is the cause for this deviation from the Apostle's customary
practice? The mOSt likely explanation lies in the nature of the letter.
It is a friendly, informal epistle. Earlier it was observed that in the
greeting Paul omits reference to his apostolic standing, unlike all his
previous introductions to the churches. He does not stand on ceremony
with the Philippians, and neither does he represent himself as one
seeking to influence by the weight of authority alone. In this instance
we have the expression of a loving, grateful friend whose counsels are
intermingled with personal and affectionate asides.

Because of the friendly informality of this letter we do not have
before us a closely knit pattern of doctrine or argument wherein every
section articulates with the preceding and the following. Nevertheless,
as pointed out in the discussion regarding the development of ideas,

the epistle does possess a central theme--that of unity, and also a

     
  
    
  
   
  
   

\ , . I I .1. ..I I . .. c r; 11b: 4“

   

O .
.

i r' ((11 - ‘f

4

.-- - 2-

 
    
   

'.‘

2“

— ' ' I: I ;‘ :‘- _L :25 unit fix;

.-*-.-.&

I I ~ . L Juwoi

[‘7_“"

,.
hr
..

."“‘-""

7:34-32

 
 

v
..

 

v; V .
_I
yr;

...—... ...-..."..- v -.
._ - v
- .‘IA

4!
i
.4
.

I I . ;. who-J.

~ I a ;‘L!Q u‘r

rim 5‘ ”bow.
I
: I ' _ unit'q'b '-

Q.

'5 l I r w, , spit! 83.77

z ' “
I, I. .3. Jar (h 51‘1“."
4 ‘1”

v

. VI-
-I I v.3 ya. emu/u"
I" I I nihuo‘x :‘
0 .
i“ ‘ ',':5 ('7 mg *‘I‘
I
_‘ _' r; 73"1 adj 10 J
1:33.:r an)! "(15:68

I 5. (Ir: rlji" seam -

371

subsidiary theme concerning the Christian duty of rejoicing in all
circumstances. We recall in this connection that

. . . the critic is interested in finding out whether the speaker's

conception of his task--be it to explain, to entertain, to convince,
or to persuade--is clear, and whether the selection and arrange-
ment of the ideas conduce to their effectiveness. 1

Certainly it seems apparent that the Apostle had a clear conception of
his task, and the arguments marshalled by him were so selected and
arranged on the whole (considering the purposeful informality of the
letter) as to be conducive to the effectiveness of his designs.

We do not find evidence in the introduction that the Apostle made
a calculated attempt to gain the attention and interest of his audience.
Neither does his conclusion fulfill some of the classic purposes of an
effective conclusion. On the other hand, momentary reflection is
sufficient to suggest why this is the case. Paul had no hostile audience
to woo. In all probability, before the first word of his message was
read aloud, the audience was attentive and expectant, inasmuch as they
dearly loved this human author of their religious experience. In this
instance there was no strong element of opposition to Paul such as
existed in the Corinthian and Galatian situations. The words of Eisenson
are pertinent in this connection.

A successful performance requires that the speaker have ability
in arousing and directing only those responses which are useful
for his purpose. The technique of influencing an audience is
divided by Hollingworth into five steps: (1) Securing attention,
(2.) Establishing interest, (3) Making an impression, (4) Convinc-
ing the audience, and (5) Directing theéaudience.

Notin every audience, however, does the Speaker have to
go through all five steps. Frequently part of the job may be done
for him before he meets the audience. The amount of the task
that remains to be done and the amount already accomplished

 

 

 

lThonssen and Baird, p. 393.

‘1‘ L: nowrna 9

   
  
      
  
   
   
  
  
   
  
  
   

.
.. .- ., -
,I “1.1,;19" . 1',

'I ~.. 'HIIT) ’ Alb“
. . I !
I.-<. . .'I U". 11"
I .1 ~--‘I!‘..unu'
r~ . HI” I at} h‘
'I
C

I ‘T'l name.“

. ‘ 'p
_I _.U IL 9:135 .
.'\, ' ‘f‘. ..-

‘ 7
"l .

I!“ :-

L'
II ,
u
-
.
0

.M'i
I- Jim-351m

"; I :[I‘Sdl («q 113:!
, I

‘\

I- aim; adj

It

I"‘ 'Nv'Lul eh” ‘i
_: {I'-

‘ C6V’.Q ‘;"

I ‘ I

Uni-mo 41;"?

t :3" L. ‘ .:‘-zzoq7'
- L3H rhino}! ,
( ) ...'<I- 2.er guide“
' (I) If Jar/nab
L n.7, Yitovs I!) ». '
17;-’56 Evil 1:: '
It. I133". .1. -

I. .- 1 ed rd 6‘ ;-“- ,-

,. 1‘ If}: h

 

372

depend in large part upon the type of audience and the audience
situation with which the speaker is concerned.

The fourth general type of audience is the rather highly
integrated, concerted audience. The members of this type of
audience assemble because they have a concerted active purpose,
and a mutual and sympathetic interest in an enterprise. . . .

The Speaker in such a group has to convince and to direct action.
He has the right to expect, unless he is a particularly poor
Speaker, that attention, interest, and the making of an impression

are inherent in the Speech situation. 1 (emphasis ours)

Results

 

We have no precise knowledge of the immediate results of this
discourse to the Philippians. We do know, however, that about a
generation later, when Polycarp wrote to the same church, his letter,
like that of Paul, was full of commendation. 2 Thus it would appear
probable that the problem of incipient disunity at Philippi had dissolved,
either as a result of the Apostle's letter or some other potent but
unknown cause. i

In the closing pages of this dissertation will be found in addition
to a rhetorical evaluation some remarks regarding the long-range
influence of Paul's letters, including the present one to the Philippians.
For the present it may suffice to point out that the passage concerning
Christ's kenosis (2:5-11) has been probably the most influential and the
most frequently quoted passage of all Scripture in theological contro-
versy. It has particularly dominated the unending diSputeS regarding
the nature of Christ. At the famous church councils of the fourth and
fifth centuries, which molded dogma for generations to come, it was

this passage in Philippians which played the major part in the conclusions

 

lJon Eisenson. The Psychology of Speech (New York: Appleton-
Century-Crdfts, Inc., 1938), pp. 204-206.

 

zFarrar, St. Paul, p. 605.

 

.

4 “H.111“;

 

“Hun/g
. _ w, "
, ‘; .L‘; 8‘1”” ,- .

v

. _ t. r,
:—I'7‘ ("Ur 31*! I

I' . “min-x

 

373

reached. Furthermore, the influence of the Pauline statements regard-
ing the Christian duties of Spiritual unity and rejoicing, while admitted-
ly beyOnd exact calculations, has certainly permeated a large portion

of Christian society for centuries.

VII. THE DISCOURSE TO PHILEMON AND THE
CHURCH AT HISHOUSE

. . . whereas the letters of the great Romans [Cicero, Seneca,
Pliny] with all their literary skill and finish, often leave on us an
involuntary impression of the vanity, the insincerity, even in
some instances the entire moral instability of their writers, on
the other hand, this brief letter of St. Paul reveals to us yet
another glimpse of a character worthy of the very noblest utter-
ances which we find in his other Epistles. These few lines, at
once so warmhearted and so dignified, . . . express principles
of eternal applicability which even down to the latest times have
had no small influence in the develOpment of the world's history.1

As though Heaven cared for Slaves'. 2'

It is forbidden to teach a Slave the Law.3

And thus the Epistle to Philemon becomes the practical manifesto
of Christianity against the horrors and iniquities of ancient and
modern Slavery. From the very nature of the Christian Church--
from the fact that it was "a kingdom not of this world"--it could
not be revolutionary. It was never meant to prevail by physical
violence, or to be promulgated by the sword. It was the revelation
of eternal principles, not the elaboration of practical details.4

It is the letter of a Christian gentleman, kindly, courteous, tact-
ful, unselfish, and chivalrous, not too proud to solicit a favour
yet incapable of servility, and withal possessing that quality of

 

lFarrar, St. Paul, p. 623. .
2Macrob. Saturn. ll.
3Ketubhoth 28, 1.

4Farrar, St. Paul, p. 625.

 

 

!

.....mmm‘

t.
'u

n!
w

LI. :3“!

.,A, ~,
.JIJLJUBH "

.x

E
m
.1

: :54 r :1 :(djai‘

v

 

 

 

374

humour which is the salt of social intercourse. It is the sort
of appeal which is irresistible. 1

He Speaks, therefore, with that peculiar grace of humility and
courtesy, which has, under the reign of Christianity, developed
the Spirit of chivalry, and what is called "the character of a
gentleman"--certainly very little known in the old Greek and
Roman civilisationS--while yet in its graceful flexibility and
vivacity it stands contrasted with the more impassive Oriental
stateliness . 2

The letter . . . has been drawn up with the same attention, the
same care, the same solicitude of heart and logic as an Epistle
to the Corinthians or the Romans. This is the characteristic
feature of true charity. The very smallness of its object proves
its reality and forms its grandeur.3

. . . a Semite by the austere gravity of his piety, the apostle
was a Hellene by the amenity of his Spirit and the grace of his
language. Erasmus praised his Ciceronian eloquence with
reference to the passage at the end of Romans viii.; cannot one
also praise the Atticism of his Epistle to Philemon. . . .4

Phillips Translation of Philemon

 

Paul, prisoner for the sake of Jesus Christ, and brother
Timothy to Philemon our fellow-worker, Apphia our sister and
Archippus who is with us in the fight; to the Church that meets in
your house--grace and peace be to you from God our Father and
from the Lord, Jesus Christ.

I always thank God for you, Philemon, in my constant
prayers for you all, for I have heard how you love and trust both
the Lord Jesus Himself and those who believe in Him. And I pray
that those who Share your faith may also share your knowledge of

 

lDavid Smith, p. 574.

zBarry, Ellicott, Vol. 8, p. 268.
3Godet, p. 460.

41bid.

 

    

A t

:3 »i «L’aiw

.

“bk!

d

"IJL

b .

xu.aU3

.L‘

:r 1) '

. i

J
1'“:

u ‘

  
 

‘Ii‘if'

.1054 '

Lid? ml!

'1‘
,.

' r127;

I I. if“,

a . .
Liz-~38

    

. ...

v' -} k f"

 

r. .
o.
J
m
...

I

.j awry“ A

,‘l‘f

   

 

375

all the good things that believing in Jesus Christ can mean to us.
It is your love that gives us such comfort and happiness, for it
cheers the hearts of your fellow-Christians. And although I could
rely on my authority in Christ and dare to order you to do what I
consider right, I am not doing that. No, I am appealing to that
love of yours, a simple personal appeal from Paul the old man,

in prison for Jesus Christ's sake. I am appealing for my child.
Yes, I have become a father though I have been under lock and
key, and the child's name is --Onesimus'. Oh, I know you have
found him pretty useless in the past but he is going to be useful
now, to both of us. I am sending him back to you: will you
receive him as my son, part of me? I should have dearly loved
to have kept him with 'me: he could have done what you would have
done--looked after me here in prison for the GOSPel's sake. But
I would do nothing without consulting you first, for if you have a
favour to give me, let it be Spontaneous and not forced from you by
circumstances'.

 

 

It occurs to me that there has been a purpose in your losing
him. You lost him, a slave, for a time; now you are having him
back for good, not merely a slave, but as a brother-Christian.
He is already eSpecially loved by me--how much more will you be
able to love him, both as a man and as a fellow-Christian! You
and I have so much in common, haven't we? Then do welcome
him as you would welcome me. If you feel he has wronged or
cheated you put it down to my account. I've written this with my
own hand: 1, Paul, hereby promise to repay you. (Of course I'm
not stressing the fact that you might be said to owe me yourxvery
soul'.) Now do grant me this favour, my brother--such an act of
love will do my old heart good. As I send you this letter I know
you'll do what I ask--I believe, in fact, you'll do more.

Will you do something else? Get the guest-room ready for
n_1_e, for I have great hopes that through your prayers I myself
will be returned to you as well'.

Epaphras, here in prison with me, sends his greetings:
so do Mark, Aristarchus, Demas and Luke, all fellow-workers
for God. The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your Spirit,
Amen.
PAUL. (emphasis in text)

 

w: '

   
  
  
   
   
   
   
 
   

my; ldfl 1‘00 :u I
3. i.‘ an»! '1 ..i‘
l Id Sm" 7"
7.» in»; '(J: 2.;

' gm; 2:. 169.1...
I, ....my .5

I' 'lnmgw

A

.‘J

.- :I‘.'L.. 'v’} '1
I - i
-I I«_:::I'r:(!(u .m-

'. " 1C 31
‘

..- "- Y ‘ '
.. b.
I 'V :1 .1“! ‘1’
I (I211: at
' [ gyrl (dry
. 976d!) 7 "
L” y 9.;
;;‘_1/Anr,'x{ b5. ;.
" ,1 :lnw'
I . :. use”;

,‘ ’ Cl'f‘

, :2 '42 91 nt},

v. r'
m Y HIV I -
3’1; t I: nut 11 ,‘-.

3121qu

376

The Occasion

 

The immediate setting of the letter to Philemon can be easily
reconstructed from the epistle itself, and from a few verses in
Colossians. The letter was written by Paul from Rome during his
first imprisonment about the year 63 A. D. It was occasioned by the
conversion of a runaway slave from Colossae who had journeyed to
Rome in the hope of "covering his tracks" and losing his identity in
the great city. How the slave came in contact with the prisoner we
do not know. We are aware that many of the Roman Christians were
slaves, and possibly it was through the instrumentality of one of these
that Onesimus was introduced to Paul. Another likelihood lies in the
possibility of Paul's already being known to the slave. The epistle
clearly informs us that Paul and the master of Onesimus were intimately
acquainted, and therefore it may have been that the slave had seen or
at least heard of the Apostle.

For about two years of his first Roman imprisonment, Paul was
permitted to live in a house rented at his own expense. While chained
to his Roman guard, he taught regularly all who visited him. (See Acts
28:16-30). There are indications that later the Apostle was shifted to
the barracks of the Praetorian guards for stricter custody. Probably it
was during the first period of his imprisonment that Paul had occasion
to write to Philemon. The converted Onesimus had confessed the
robbery of his master, but was willing now to return and face the house-
hold at Colossae.

To understand the real nature of the problem facing Paul, it is
necessary to glance at the institution of slavery in the Roman world.
Estimates of the number of slaves during the first century A. D. vary
considerably, but it is probable that there were at least forty million

in number.

'10

.,
,9 ‘
..(vhbm

emnn

..\
.11

3r. 051151 '
3'me slit '

(A
(a
'rf
.‘l0

1
. v

. I t. ..
‘ V,
. ..13.‘ .l).v...
o ...:anr... I
”6”!th . - t ,on.
n .Al 1.7 . fl '1'

.

'l . I l I
{.cilvl I .vql- ( .
1,1531. V .I‘ \.u. ... -‘Itftlklicllll; ‘

,lv‘f‘larl . . .1.

 

377

Outwardly, the Roman state during the first century of
our era was a magnificent political structure, so large that
Alexander's empire became one of its minor provinces.
Underneath this glory there lived millions upon millions of poor
and tired human beings, toiling like ants who have built a nest
underneath a heavy stone. They worked for the benefit of some-
one else. They shared their food with the animals of the fields.
They lived in stables. They died without hope. 1

In the writings of historians we find contrasting descriptions of
slavery in the time of the Empire. According to some, the picture is
entirely black; and after reading the descriptions, one wonders why
more slaves did not commit suicide. Others have made the piCture a
light gray, and it would seem that slavery on the whole was so endurable
that even some poverty stricken free men rejoiced at the chance of
becoming other men's pr0perty. Contemporary laws and contemporary
historians of the Empire present less prejudiced views of the institution.
It becomes evident that the slavery of the second century and thereafter
was more tolerable than the slavery of Paul's day. Most of the laws
regulating the condition of these human chattels belong to the later
period when manurnission became more frequent.

During the years of the Republic and the early Empire the practice
of exposing new-born children was common. (The first law against
this procedure was legislated in A.D. 374.) While hundreds of exposed
children died, large numbers were claimed by slavery. With the
cessation of war on a large scale, the influx of slaves from conquered
people had decreased to a mere trickle, and thus their numbers had
now to be increased from within the Empire itself. Sometimes free men
convicted of crime were sentenced to slavery. The commonest method

of enslavement was birth itself. If the child's mother was a slave, then

 

1Hendrik W. Van Loon, The Story of Mankind (New York: Pocket
Books Inc., 1939), p. 85.

 

   

m

    

”5
- 1",“
-- rariz?;';:d.

    
  
 
  
     
   
  

. i

I: .-‘. Izno
- . c t .. .71. :. u'wsb
, - - : -.‘ ' hints .13
2 .I ‘ . l ‘--’ I _ln' "d b. 4‘
. '_ ~ ' _ 1 .. ‘ ‘_ 1.: -. Amen
’ . . I ..c , L . "III“. .03 .
,, , . _. _- . - ..7 nevi}. ‘
u I ‘1;

,-
O.
.

- . . .. 123i:wI

"

'cl

IT .- . ...
t

‘-

.. .
I - - - c

‘L

I'-

l'n’
V

a w
r

r". V

wk} 10,;

(
v

'Q “Libra I.
.

u ‘ I ~ '
' . ; - " .. lefs'zuw‘lr
;'. ,. .. . ,Lj'i ruin 01g.-

.. ' r
HI‘flm {'3
~. - :,_ :1 V cm ,..
‘ ' ’4‘:
. ,_
dwell
I

.p

3 ilrt
Il
'M~fl. f-
I
f

I;

,-' .- -.I s: m. 1

 

378

the status of the progeny was the same, regardless of the legal position

of the father .

. . . at the beginning of the Empire slaves were still cheap,

and their lives were of little value compared with the pleasures

of the conqueror, whose heart had been hardened by success.

To this rather than to the brutalizing influence of warfare, which
may be greatly exaggerated, may be attributed the insensibility

of the Roman to suffering in slavery or animal. It was the very
success of Empire, the enjoyment of absolute power, that changed
ruthless steadfastness to the blindness of heart which rejoices in
gratuitous cruelty. . . .

The lives of slaves were freely expended in the mad freaks
of masters who aimed at eclipsing their predecessors or con-
temporaries by some gorgeous show or atrocious novelty, or
attempt to perform the impossible. To give point to a jest, life
or limb was accounted cheap; to demonstrate the owner's generosity,
slaves were given away as presents, torn from their kindred or
uprooted from surroundings where they were at last making for
themselves some comfort and success. 1

Perhaps the greatest misuse of all of the slave systems in
Rome was the cult of the gladiators, slaves encouraged and
trained to fight each other or be slaughtered in dozens by a bravo,
to satisfy the lust of the public for blood and excitement, and who
were often whipped into the arena. 7'

During the first century the master had absolute control over his
slaves. He was under no legal obligation to provide for them in sick-
ness or in health. Out of mere caprice of master or mistress, slaves
were often crucified, and this was accompanied frequently by the hacking
off of limbs or the cutting out of the tongue. Such ferocity was not
universal. On occasions, affectionate relations existed between master
and slave. That this was the exception rather than the rule, however,
is indicated by the allusions to slavery in Terence, Plautus, Petronius,

Tacitus, Juvenal and Persius.

 

1R. H. Barrow, Slavery in the Roman Empire. (The Dial Press
Inc. New York, 1928), p. 29.

 

ZGeorge MacMunn, Slavery Through the Ages. (London: Nicholson
and Watson Limited, 1938), pp. 24-25.

 

 

   
   
   
  
 
    
    
   
   
   
  

- ,. iI‘L’ 1‘ '{quaqo "..;
' l

I. g...
L . .. W'. I «I vim
» v -... . 1' ; ‘Ig‘fllil 1-A1I .
-. -- .' _ ,- I ’LUUI’IOQ. '-
- :: I . ': Juan!!! 8
, ~- : - {incur ..

-,I,' :‘ I '1‘st

- - :' e V 7’ f'u aB-y.
. _ . I. ;I .. new eub_
,.., F'Illfl""
\ , -- , - '.'. .. 'i)’. od'l‘v “ .4
- '-:'. 03“ _f r,
\ _. ; _. 7:)i'LE1C“

.L- ’3 Sq '_

- , - - - ;. .7'.' 11;v.'g.--~

1:.
3:;-

- ‘ ‘ e. .' I '9'” a ,
. . . 1
- . ." .H'vi we 0 r

. - ., . .1. .252‘1153'I.”
&

- -;, . II: 1,. fil'Ibq ..

5 I

, .'_ - :‘. ; 'I s :13 an {I

, ~ I- s . JI‘LI'I 63 ...§

a - .' . , I - . :. ;I.:Il win tit. -

- - - :_ .i‘ ".. (103,0 . - ‘

.I, I;

H L . "J L Juiii ed: 1;, ‘ t

— . . - - . ' g. '. :LI‘u 9.50 3'

- , ,_ ; - , --- . .xffiLfi-U "
r '1’)

-' _ ;I L. .I‘; ,fILfilO =

.‘ -l
. . 3 - Inflmmmg

-; .- ._ - f: 'c' -J -.;'.'I..-‘. ,JxPlaL‘ooo'

.~ » ._. ‘ I . . y; 's;1;'.crai[B3'

EFL-f 15‘; cc. ) .5. . - .' .;" "HY we

 

wilt-M Lettuce?) .35; ". :54: 5.3.!" . :‘.‘:‘ \r-z "III {XIII/b
.. . :, . ‘ 5‘ .

 

I .
47 ‘. ‘h- . '

\., ...

_ j. <‘ . ‘ ‘ v

379

The philosophy of the age did little to alleviate the lot of the
enslaved. Aristotle had declared that the evident difference between
men indicated that some were meant to be slaves, and as for Plato,
in his depiction of the ideal state the institution is retained without
apparently the idea ever having occurred to the author that a state
could function without slaves. The attitude of the Stoics in the days
of the Empire was only a slight improvement upon the attitude of
Aristotle and Plato. 1 Even Cato the elder, so often exalted as a model
of Pagan virtue, sold his faithful slaves once they had become so old
as to be of little use to him.

About a year before Onesimus had arrived in Rome, the Prefect,
Pedanius Secundus, was murdered by a slave who was his master's
rival for the affections of a fellow slave. After the Senate had dis-
cussed the matter, an obsolete law was enforced which required that
all the slaves of that household should be executed.

. . . Nero sided with the Senate . . . The imperial tiger had
long ago tasted blood, and relished the taste. He ordered the
execution to be carried out by military force. In the sight of
the whole city . . . that long line of slaves (400 in number)--
old and young, men and women and children- -had been led forth
to die. 2

No wonder a slave of the age exclaimed "I know the cross will be
my sepulchre; all my ancestors are buried there. "3

These reminiscences from history suggest some aSpects of the
problem faced by Paul as he sought to accomplish a safe homecoming

for Onesimus.

 

1David Smith, The Life and Letters of St. Paul, p . 573.

zFarrar, Messages, p. 342.

 

3Miles Gloriosus i.4, 19 by Plautus, cited by Farrar, Messages,
p. 345.

 

 

    
    
    
   
  
    
   

-_. oiig‘ .I. '(Ihgrwag

;' '..‘ Is)“. 01.1018 .0

.. g: -~ u (v’. 3.1-in ......"I

- . -1: I. fut} 10 n' ..
‘..L.'I‘- .ibbi {‘11

- . . . .m [231.7 ”in
...,

("II n 01'

-‘ air-K: b

~1'-- '- ,suit

.' L III) 913111:

,_ - .e .L.I.u'{ .6 ‘ , ‘-

V y r J ‘. Mun 01%;:

a ’_I" 53.13 ‘-“’.

' 1 c
, yr,
, - _ . I .. .
- | I 1., .
‘ - ...(1' ~
. . (31'. 919
. “1!"va
u
3

; ,1 “.1: fjvvcf’j Yd I

': I .2 51:15.11! ,‘Ief‘
.' . .I .-.szsaeshéf
E_______,_>

’3' . .I sweat ' ,

 

380

If he returned to Colossae, Philemon, even if he were a kind-
hearted man, would in no sense be transgressing the most
ordinary customs of the day if he had branded Onesimus or sent
him to work in chains in some stifling and horrible ergastulum,
or tortured, or resold him into slavery for anything which he
would fetch from a fresh master, who might treat him with the
worst extremes of Pagan cruelty. He might fall into the hands
of some owner, who would, without compunction, fling him into
a fishpond to feed the lampreys or even nail him to a cross to
feed the ravens and the kites. 1

It would be a mistake indeed to view Philemon as one with a back-
ground of centuries of Christian culture. Christianity's mission was
not to destroy existing institutions by sudden tumult but rather to sow
the seeds of Christian principles which ultimately would crowd out
such barbarisms as slavery. This was to take almost two millenniums.
Philemon was a child of his age, and only in recent years had he become
a Christian. To persuade him to forgive the slave who had absconded
with some of his wealth and dissipated it amid the glamour of Rome,
was no slight objective.

The actual situation in which Paul, Philemon, and Onesimus
stood at the moment when the runaway met the apostle may be
illustrated from a document published in the Oxyrhynchus Papyri,
Vol 14 (1920), No 1643 (dated 298 A.D.). Here one Aurelius
Sarapammon writes to a friend, whose name has perished, as
follows: "1 commission you by this writ to journey to the famous
city of Alexandria and search for my slave, by name. . . , about
35 years old, known to you. When you have found him you shall
place him in custody, with authority to shut him up and whip him
and to lay a complaint before the proper authorities against any

persons who have harbored him, with a demand for satisfaction. ..2

 

1Farrar, Messages, p. 342.

zThe Abingdon Bible Commentary, ed F. c. Eiselen et- 11-
(Nashville, N.Y.: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, 1929), p. 1292.

 

 

‘ . :vrzri odd, ..

. i. ‘-_..q

,:.I IzaaeM-i
.-- -«~.——4

, I
. I.) cam-g I

36315:

.
'. .. .. ’ 4‘
- . . .rI},‘{$IA : J

‘ f

   
    
  
   
   
       
  
   

I

l
,tuxm

Ii 210v, ‘_
in "10 :‘I '
'41 (£333: 1’
'.:,I aim
,1 . ‘y-‘-1(u ”‘7
Le; ' J ["04 2'
:. IJZ'L 5 "I .

. 3 ' I
I. .‘1 ed b It -
«.2- um: _
III? L YO? ;

. (I.
I’H'igltn m;-

.2 than?! -.
7:1. .‘3 8“
‘O

'I

1'.

«L, In V.
A:
'1’. [O ,-.l

. ‘ 0'

UV; :2; . .-, ..

r5» 5 7&8 '

381

Analysis of the Deve10pment of Ideas, with
Emphasis Upon Logos

 

 

". . . an Epistle unrivalled in tenderness, and pathos, and
refined delicacy, and courtesy, --rendered more attractive by its genial
playfulness of style, and breathing a divine Spirit of Christian wisdom
and love“1--such an epistle could not simultaneously bear the stamp of
overt dialectic. We search this letter in vain for the measured argu-
ments which characterized the address to the Galatians.

Logic is present in Philemon none the less, but it is the logic
which impresses the mind through suggestion rather than by obvious
and direct statement. The prOposition made by Paul is--"Philemon,
you ought to forgive this runaway slave who has wronged you. " See
verses 15-17. The rationale implied in the letter is as follows.

You should forgive Onesimus because:

1. He has become a Christian, (and all Christians are equal in

God's sight.

2. He has become Specially dear to me, Paul.

3. Circumstances indicate that it was God's providence that
your slave ran away, and met me here in Rome.

4. There is no real necessity that he should risk returning to
you, but both he and I think it is the right thing to do. So
don't take advantage of this.

5. You are indebted to me because I brought you the gospel and
to grant my wish in this matter would be a fitting act of
gratitude.

6. I hope to visit you and Onesimus when I get out of prison.
This will be a happy occasion only if I find that you have become

reconciled to One simus .

 

lWordsworth, Vol. II, p. 335.

382

This rationale is based on concepts that are particularly Christian
in nature--the concept that a Christian is marked by an attitude of love
and forbearance to his fellow men; that gratitude is a constant main-
Spring of action; that all believers are equal in God's sight; that events
do not just "happen" but are overruled by the providence of God; that
a Christian's chief concern is the same as Christ's, the redeeming of
humanity; and finally, that Christianity makes a man a gentleman.
These concepts are significant to the rhetorical critic. AS Croft has
written:

Human values can be talked about only as constellations of atti-

. tude moving through qualitative changes in historical continuity.
The effort to comprehend this "history of ideas” is at the center
of Speech criticism, for rhetorical adaptation can be understood
only on the basis of an adequate historical perspective on these
germinal values. 1

Let us now consider the manner in which Paul makes mention of
these ideas. He:

. . . enters on this delicate subject with many precautions.

It is a siege in all form. He refrains from immediately stating
the object of his request. He first reminds Philemon what he

iS who addresses him (vv. 8, 9); then he Speaks to him of him
for whom he addresses him (vv. 10-16). And it is only after
having thus made the approaches that he delivers the assault by
pronouncing the great word proslabou receive him (W. 17-21). 2

 

 

Because the address is brief, it may best be studied in verse

sequence.

Paul, a prisoner for Christ Jesus, and Timothy our brother,

To Philemon our beloved _ fellow worker and Apphia our Sister and
Archippus our fellow soldier, and the church in your house:

Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus
Christ.3

 

1Albert J. Croft, "The Functions of Rhetorical Criticism, "
Quarterly Journal of Speech, Vol. XLII (October, 1956), pp. 283-291.

ZGodet, p. 454. It is recognized that this quotation has reference
to DiSpositio but it is included here as being also applicable to the
develOpment of ideas.

 

3Rsv, Philemon, vv1-3

 

    
    
     
   
 

K ‘ ; ; :24 '2‘ L-hsno -

».| ;, Jr'gffl'fln

' _‘ p- ,- .‘ “.‘...‘;i.‘;no

. - . ; ; ‘wmmfltfl‘

\ ‘ -, . .sirfri 8': 4’
. '

: .’.. [Liqb I. .

i ' ‘ v \ :‘HLL'I ‘ -_
‘ .l . Y EZ'GII'
. 3 J'J'm 1‘
. V
- . .. “ KIT: - o,

__ v- . --.iu«.‘am”
. ,s
I

,, '.1'/ mm,

L ; ' j ; , 4' Q’. .. '. .v ,, :Luroai‘kr
_- _V j .. f‘: _ . ;~, W 422... ..r, 2:!10 no- «_w

,. _ ‘ . . “.i.f:J.1-IUQ -,

5:; 9.511 1723523113. 2i": 31:1; ; : if» 71:31 .k um ,.
5th (5:! :Jdfisilr-gx r a}: ~r”:; ’5: 3.":1‘: ' Si.ri-:vr:i'al 4'

 

383

The writer is revealed as a friend imprisoned for the gospel's
sake. In almost every other address, the words "an apostle” follow
the reference to Paul's name. To convey the concept of friendliness
rather than authority, the salutation is couched in this unofficial form.
It is peculiarly apprOpriate that Paul Should refer to himself as "a
bondsman of Jesus Christ" (as the passage may be translated) in an
address where he pleads on behalf of a bond- slave.

Philemon is described both as "beloved” and a “fellow-worker. "
The first adjective embodies a Greek root which occurs five times in
these twenty-:five verses. This word m is the key to the epistle,
and reveals the theme which could be summarized thus: "a debt of
love is owed by believers to one another. " Because Philemon is
beloved by Paul, he would probably desire to respond to that love by
granting the apostle's request. The term "fellow-worker" implies that
Philemon was actively engaged in Christian endeavour. Perhaps he
led in worship the little church group which met in his house. As such
he was the more. obligated to fulfill every Christian duty, particularly
the obligation of love toward others. Paul intimates that this fellow
worker will not now belie his example as a Church’leader. Instead, he
will set an example of- Christian love by his forgiveness of Onesimus.

. Apphia is apparently the wife of Philemon, judging from the
association of her name here with Philemon. Archippus also was prob-
ably a member of the family, and a minister of the gospel as denoted
by Paul's use of the term "fellowsoldier. " (Used elsewhere by Paul
of Epaphroditus Phil 2:25; and of Timothy 2 Tim. 2:3. Compare Col.
4: 18 which refers to this same Archippus and says ”fulfil the ministry
which thou hast received from the Lord. ")

“The church in your house. " In the great cities of the Roman

Empire, large gatherings of the Christians would have excited suSpicion

' M '0» .

     
   
   
    
     
   
  

"'
:L w z buy/trek ‘.I ~_
.2 9‘

_. ~ '...;..‘.‘-I we're 11h-
,U- W. 'LUBFE (4 ‘l’_'
W
.‘- .;, ? ”liquid, "v.
I -

- . 2L : ”Kraut.“ C

- ,str win

I
. -; a: ntvu ‘
1‘ ':
. c ... .
. -.EJ stfi‘ '
.‘ti
‘ ‘3;
. ‘ g f‘ c‘ 9"l3 51;-
- x .

_ ' ..13‘ L’ mi? v,
~ 7 » ~ .. t L .' 4.11.0 OT’V
. ‘ . . Jove! 10 r

. V
; ' . -in-il nun ..

- .. 7 T blqm

- .' ; :' ' .. "..";rTQSI' 3.3:

_ \ . h cry or J1I.19d. '

- . ,; ,1! -: um 10;"

, ) , -.‘, . 3‘...“ . :53 odd 1;.
, f ; .1 5171:; lid“! .h‘x.
..., __

\

'::. ; .1. ._' .1 ur' xi ZUCY aid

" .VLu’ -...'. . ii... .."I E. ruins

z
,.
:.'-
J .'
.i. '
- i.

 

384

and it was customary for the believers to meet in groups of varying
Sizes, most frequently in large homes of leading Christians.

Both in the Old and New Testament ekklesia implies a commun-
ity based upon a special religious idea, and established in a
Special way. The word is also used in N. T. of a single church
or assembly, or of a church confined to a particular place, as
the church in the house of Prisca and Aquila (Rom. xvi. 5), or
of Philemon as here; the church at Corinth, Jerusalem, etc.

In these assemblies in private houses messages and letters
from the apostles were announced or read. It is perhaps to the
address of this letter to a congregational circle, as well as to
an individual correspondent, that we are indebted for its
preservation. 1

Possibly one reason that Paul addresses this message to the local
church as well as to Philemon was to create added pressure upon the
latter to fulfill the request of the Apostle.

I thank my God always when I remember you in my prayers,
because I hear of your love and of the faith which you have toward
the Lord Jesus and all the saints, and I pray that the sharing of
your faith may promote the knowledge of all the good that is ours
in Christ. For I have derived much joy and comfort from your
love, my brother, because the hearts of the saints have been
refreshed through you. 7‘

Paul affirms that constantly in his prayers he mentions Philemon
with gratitude for the good report he has heard concerning him. The
mention of faith in connection with an attitude to believers as well as
to Christ has puzzled many students but the explanation consists in the
probability that we have here a chiasmus where the extremes and means
each correspond. Thus it could be arranged ”love to all the saints,
and faith toward the Lord Jesus Christ. ” Theologically Speaking, the

faith should first be mentioned as the root of all actions acceptable to

 

1Marvin R. Vincent, Philippians and Philemon, The International
Critical Commentary, (Edinburgh: 1950), p. 177.

 

 

 

zRSV, Philemon, W. 4-7.

 

  

- _ L -
(7 , \
~ 1- ‘
l v. \
i '4 \
fl"; - x
(W? ' ~ ‘ ‘ ’ ' ‘
u‘ n
r ‘1 ‘41? ”a
I ‘ 7' r
I‘ :l \

- ;.I.J£)(n:’a’

4r. .. w: ..1 d5:

(' median

'- ,' : 3am" Yank

.' L ‘r {71111.1
-.'.'._
v Leisure”

.-r. :7f':[ our 1. .

   
  
  
  
   
   
  
   
   
  
  

i \u'iuwmpoufi '

.. L' i 1'\ q“ a, l
, u .vuw ”I.
‘Yl‘dfuu‘ .'

-';.'.::.ri:11('p .
‘3 >11 It]: 1 ,, ‘a
1 nuns}; b .. Q

r v5.3 (1:! ‘

v'
,4

1 LI" adj be. ' t
('l‘.

.V‘ {13 1’ _ur': a 34).!

L ((3 31"} _.n :‘

, ’ J;
, I” - r
:‘I ’.Lr(..1‘,,bmo ,,
:4, "

W-c.i stub '2
5:3! art! ed M I

385

God. Paul, however, mentions love first, because the objective of
this message is to motivate Philemon to an act of love.

Thus Paul refers to the good reputation of this leading believer
in Colosse, and delicately expresses his hope that the same loving

attitude will continue to be manifested. Ethos is here working in

 

reverse, with Paul building up the character of the chief member of
the audience in order that the latter might strive to live up to his good
name.

Judging from verse seven, Philemon has become famous for his
hospitality. News of it has even reached Paul in Rome, hundreds of
miles away. The logical implication of the prayer of the Apostle is
that the love and faith which has cheered "the hearts of the saints"
will be "shared" with the returning absconder, although the slave as
yet has not even been named.

And although I could rely on my authority in Christ and
dare to order you to do what I consider right, I am not doing
that. No, I am appealing to that love of yours, a Simple personal
appeal from Paul the old man, in prison for Jesus Christ's sake. 1

AS an Apostle, Paul could rightly order the believer to comply
with the request he is about to make. Philemon was indebted to him
for his conversion, and their relationship had long been one of intimacy
(v 17). On these grounds Paul's slightest wish Should have been tanta-
mount in effect, (though not in expression), to a direct command.

Such is the implication 'in these verses. The Greek wOrd translated
"right" by Phillips (anekon) has been adroitly chosen. It literally
means "that which is fitting. " The inference is that it is no unreason-
able request that the Apostle is about to make. It is one that is alto-
gether appr0priate and fitting, and therefore it should be fulfilled

without delay or questioning.

 

1J. B. Phillips, Letter to Young Churches (New York:
Macmillan Company, 1948), p. 157, Philemon verses 8, 9.

 

-.?

,uvu‘

LL‘

VIJ‘

7..L»

~)~2.¥l¢bf

J _

i

.M‘._., ._ .) I
. -- .... .4»

...-'17..

..4..1.Il|. .4? ‘19.
but)...
if

" rimdi‘) 4 2.4"-

  

:235c2 Hus p .,. .. .

r "'1

.46'

o

. mam-93595 ',

    

  

 

386

Once more we have a repetition of the key word of this letter--
love. It is "for love's sake" as most versions translate it, that
Philemon should hasten to comply with the coming injunction. Else-
where Paul had written of love as the pre-eminent virtue of
Christians. Without it, eloquence, knowledge, faith, zeal counted for
nothing. He had described love as follows:

Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not;
charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, doth not behave
itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked,
thinketh no evil; rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the
truth; beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all
things, endureth all things. Charity never faileth:l

Christ also had declared that this virtue of love was to be known
as the distinguishing badge of believers in Him.2 Therefore, when Paul
appeals to love as the basis for Philemon's attitude to Onesimus, he
is building upon premises already accepted by the slave-owner. The
latter professed to worship a supreme Deity whose chief attribute was
love.3 If his worship was sincere, his own attitude should bear the
same stamp. The conduct which Paul proposes thus becomes "a reason-
able service" (Rom. 12:1). This is doubly the case when the source
of the request is pointed out to be Philemon's personal friend who is
not only an Apostle but also one who has been prematurely aged by
excessive labours, and who at this present time is confined to a prison
by Nero. Obviously the main appeal here is ethical in nature, but there
are also present strong indications that the proposed conduct would be
the only rational behavior that could be pursued by Philemon, a profess-

ing Christian, in view of the circumstances surrounding the request.

 

1KJV, 1 Corinthians 13:4-8.
2John 13:34-35.
31 John 4:8.

     
   
  
   
   
 
    
  
  
   

I? 'LJHfl‘ b :.'.

1' 'rflluw 63¢
g ,1; .th (”kw
4.. .' 8:57 “01:25 ‘
‘ O
-.,. 1 (.12 “0“1
:.';“I'U.1'V '
.r.‘
-- ,1" Lemur '
- ; .‘f; \U )__
- . flashed u' ‘
.V
.L‘.Ul ".8 ,- ‘

; pl" (991.5

. L {uiyxjv '1‘" -
C
‘40..

”13.3 w sunk a
. ; cur; xtccmifl

‘3 P-aa'.

vjitfr‘ufli "

- P.

'. x -' u?!
. n05)

. 1 -cu.
:3: 1H! 81 ...).
’ A

:L’TJIYJ'B ' I _...
L‘V"

:- , . (9.533 wj
' V¢

1r ivuizd .. ...I

45’,

.
.‘

'73 '10 wow
1' J.

« ....er :5

 

 

387

In effect, the Apostle in these opening verses is suggesting to Philemon

the following reasons for his pardoning the slave.

10

Christians worship a God of love and therefore must them-

selves be loving in attitude.

. You have already shown your love to many. Therefore it is
naturally expected you will continue to manifest this attitude.
. Besides this, the present request is one that in itself is

anékon--fitting. You are not being asked to do something that

would be inappropriate.

And remember who it is that makes this request. It is an
Apostle, a leader of the Faith. It is Paul, who brought you

the GosPel, and gave you the hope of eternal life. It is an aged
warrior, worn with the strenuous unselfish labours of many
years. It is a prisoner soon to be tried for his life and perhaps
face the executioner' 5 block. Naturally you will want to please
him.

I appeal to you for my child, Onesimus, whose father I

have become in my imprisonment. l

I am appealing for my child. Yes I have become a father

though I have been under lock and key, and the child' S name iS--
Onesimus'. z

The order of the words in the Phillips translation is preferable

to that of the RSV, for the original Greek has the name of the runaway

placed last. This is skillfully done, the purpose being first to give a

favourable description of the escapee before pronouncing the name that

would inevitably stir unpleasant memories.

Paul continues with his implied reasons for forgiving Onesimus.

He asserts:

 

1RSV, verse 10.

ZPhillips, verse 10.

   

1‘.

- \' -1 .2: .:z.- villa.

37.12:. ‘rrJJ 7138‘ ,‘

. ,. I .1
' ...ri IIJm/ as: .. s

;. L13 ‘c ,

    
   
   
  
 
   
   
   
   
  

ml: (2:13:31.
ilf 'i‘t-I £00343, 1
, u
~Lci:-'L .' mm I“

,. .11.: u: .

k' :o':.'1u‘!6d*.

.. ,= im '4be
J
. '.:"I;..--£; 3,;

“ ludb

5|

-;.' trier?
. _\'

,_ .5 some
I,"

,L’JQLCIO‘ -:'
'-

1.:' ‘chS 1nd .-
r, c-Ld o‘lfid

,,
Ste

' .c

.4» '
uh? '10 m“;

:r’;. _r'1 ,VBJ-

l

r 2]: ch,

ncijqf i
)0? ‘

C

388

l. I count Onesimus as my spiritual child, and therefore
Philemon, you should treat the Slave with reSpect.

2. The slave has become a Christian. He has been "born again. "
Therefore, all other Christians should rejoice over him and
love him.

3. The circumstances of the conversion of Onesimus are so
extraordinary as to betoken the special intervention of
Providence. Who would expect that while 1, Paul, am a
prisoner in chains, 1 would be able to convert an escapee and
thief'.

These are the implications of this aptly worded verse. Next

follows a parenthesis.

Verse 11 (Formerly he was useless to you, but now he is
indeed useful to you and to me. )1

AS the RSV points out in a footnote, the meaning of Onesimus is
”useful. " The Apostle is softening the blow of the mention of the slave's
name by a spark of humour. He puns upon the meaning of the patronymic.
It is not, however, humour alone that is involved. In effect the Apostle
is providing another reason for the forgiveness of the runaway. That
reason is the fact that the Slave has become a new person. He is no
longer a rascal. He has become a genuine Christian whose hallmark is
usefulness. Therefore, he Should not be treated as though still a thief.
Onesimus is now "profitable" both to the Apostle and to his owner
(”to you and to me. ") He is profitable to Paul inasmuch as he has
already ministered to the aged prisoner. He will probably be profitable
to Philemon in the future. Such is the Sign reasoning involved.

Verse 12. I am sending him back to you, sending my very
heart. 2

 

lRSV, verse 11.

2Ibid., verse 12.

 

‘

,mdo: :-
l O
.nqdn‘u.

l
1511?; < I" '

‘5, T" 3.30131 ~ ,"'.
' tw-“ym
. s .

).-.L-

flaw!
no

- .... c.1150 -.....
i

‘.
I
)
virUrarr

Hw-
Diem! -,v’

. x33 . t
I,
‘ L. :1, ( ‘A. or“ -
.V . bur J.“ Zim‘ll»

,uov95w

(
‘-
3 v
Q.
‘l
l“ L.“

I: '7

is: '3 {1.7003' ;'-.-'

)h..‘.-: '

.
,'. _ .
‘., - <.

'-:.. —v_~

r

O

 

389

This intensifies the preceding by repeating the thought that the

slave is as dear to the Apostle as his own son.

I would have been glad-to keep him with me, in order that
he might serve me on your behalf during my imprisonment for
the gospel but I preferred to do nothing without your consent in
order that your goodness might not be by compulsion but of your
own free will. 1

I should have dearly loved to have kept him with me; he could
have done what you would have done--looked after me here in
prison for the GOSpel'S sake. But I would do nothing without
consulting you first, for if you have a favour to give me, let it
be spontaneous and not forced from you by circumstances'. 2

Paul reasons that it would have been possible, and to his advantage,
to have retained Onesimus as his aid. Such an act could have been
excused by rationalising that, after all, Philemon himself would have
been happy to have ministered to the Apostle had he had the opportunity.
Therefore there could be nothing wrong in permitting the slave,
Philemon's property, to supply this service. This is the implication of
"that he might serve me on your behalf" or as the KJV has it--"in thy
stead. " This is followed up with the courteous expression of the fact
that the Apostle would not so presume of the friendship of the absent
Colossian.

Here, again, there is a certain delicacy of suggestion. A slave

was his master's property; he could act only on his master's

behalf and by his consent. St. Paul is sure that Philemon's love

for him would have gladly given that consent, and so made Onesimus
an instrument of willing service to St. Paul. . . . He will not keep
Onesimus and ask that cnnsent by letter, lest it should be "as it
were of necessity"; i. e. lest it Should wear even the semblance of
constraint.3

 

lIbid. , verses 13, 14.

 

zPhillips, verses 13,14.
3Barry, Ellicotts, Vol. VIII, p. 273.

 

 

. 1
. v

I
'7 .. it 4 L c153 LJ ‘1'?

I
- 1.9;. 5V3'db_

' - Wtwesm
ll

  
   
  
  
   
 
  
 
   
   
    
    

‘h u
I

Luv: 31L? new. I"

u

-:'? wad Muo_,
‘v . :.. L man J;
i L..L ‘I EJIJd ,

s . . '. it 7‘ war

gm” 9 “

V Y . 15." on
'- ..slu in)» '-
V
m our. . ...

v

u I“

.;' FILE.“ 1: .

r3 , 9: Fr no“ '

.. . I. to (13.5; .
4

£.-:‘ " " ovrfd .

e c'. '1""a:9'1

'

4 0631-qu1

Y ‘. . L110?! ‘4

I. . as: a: _.2,
;

i : V Luv»); 5‘ :~.,:‘ .

0
yr . w' Fit! ,wA
‘W’ at.
; and n

. - - -1-

4.‘ I ' 1.0 3:16». {"4
’- 32,213 in: ”If-5‘-
"- -i z"Y3i?89€' l

t

‘0'

 

390

Verses 15, 16. Perhaps this is why he was parted from you for
a while, that you might have him back for ever, no longer as a
Slave, but more than a slave, as a beloved brother, eSpecially
to me but how much more to you, both in the flesh and in the
Lord. 1

It occurs to me that there has been a purpose in your losing him.
You lost him, a slave, for a time; now you are having him back
for good, not merely a slave, but as a brother-Christian. He is
already especially loved by me--how much more will you be able
to love him, both as a man and as a fellow-Christian! 2

Paul employs sign reasoning once more. He says in effect that
the indications are such aS to indicate the Hand of Providence in the
whole situation. Therefore, Philemon Should be quick to acknowledge
such, and co-operate with the Divine purposes. Notice that Paul does
not say the slave ”ran away" or ”escaped. " He uses a phrase which is
both euphemistic and suggestive of an overruling providence. The slave
was merely "parted from Philemon for a while, " in order that the
latter "might have him back for ever, no longer as a slave, but more
than a slave. . . ."

Onesimus' time of absence, however long, was but a Short "hour"
(so Greek) compared with the everlasting devotion henceforth
binding him to his master.3

How delicately the Apostle suggests the manurnission of the slave'.
He asks the master to receive him back as “more than a slave. ” This
thought reveals one of the basic concepts of the 1etter--name1y, the ,
equality of all men in Christ. It was no part of the mission of Christianity
to force men to change their institutions. It was, however, its mission
to motivate men to experience "the power of love" rather than the "love of

power. " Thus its reforms would of necessity be gradual, beginning with

 

lRSV, verses 15, 16.
2Phillips, verses 15, 16.
3Barry, Ellicott's, p. 273.

 

l- ”5384-".-

u,-.~.s

‘.-.

 

~p

‘. ,Hv
1%.. mum: ...

,‘ i
'.1‘.-L.'.:;.’.t¢fll$-.

...!

' ,

121.5; .61,

flu: ‘l,(-“[“" "E.

_V n
.Lj” 1‘
- .wqm'
.c.:r’.
3
tc'mrq’h
1 twisty
LLIij
~' “{‘I‘ \f‘f) (‘0. 1.-:. .
, ;,V.tjlf"g.",
UT. We“; ..:
-..S' \J 1938:-
‘e'. r, 5111.0-
. ’1
.. . z. rvrnalfl“

      

391

the implanting of principles which would gradually transform all who
acceptedthem, until the whole world was leavened with the fruit of the
GOSpel. Thus this epistle does not condemn slavery, but it reveals
concepts which once understood, would abolish every kind of injustice
and tyranny. One writer, commenting on verse 16, has declared

In these words we have at last the principle which is abso-
lutely destructive of the condition of slavery--a condition which
is the exaggeration of natural inferiority to the effacement of
the deeper natural equality. (1) The Slave--the "living chattelH
of inhuman laws and philOSOphies--is first "a brother, " united
to his master by natural ties of ultimate equality, having, there-
fore, both duties and rights. (2) But he is also a "brother
beloved. " These natural ties are not only strengthened by duty,
but made living ties by the love which delights indeed to reSpect
the rights of others, but is not content without willingness to
sacrifice even our own rights to them. (3) Above all, this is "in
the Lord. " The slave is bought by Christ's blood, made a son of
God, and therefore a brother to all who are members of the family
of God. To reject and to outrage him is a rejection and outrage
towards Christ. Compare St. Peter's striking comparison of the
sufferings of the slave to the passion of Divine Sufferer (1 Pet.

ii 18-24). They suffer with Him, and He suffers in them. It
has been proved historically that only by the aid of this last and
highest conception has the brotherhood of love--too Slowly,
indeed, but yet surely--assumed reality. 1

The implicit reasoning of this last verse is based on the assertion
that a Christian is equal to every other Christian in God's sight, and
therefore believers should have regard for one another on the same
basis. Thus Philemon should grant the regenerated Onesimus his
freedom.

Verses 17-20. So if you consider me your partner, receive him
as you would receive me. If he has wronged you at all, or owes
you anything, charge that to my account. 1, Paul, write this with
my own hand, I will repay it--to say nothing of your owing me
even your own self. Yes, brother, I want some benefit from you
in the Lord. Refresh my heart in Christ. 2

 

lIbid., p. 273.
zRSV, verses 17-20.

  
    
    
    
   
    
  

i’x ' :wiqiznhq 4

fl
. til. uh) Hind.“
.Lw {Uri-(41131313.

'.i. :3 It! ubflo

- .» . Saudi H1.
- :‘ .1 Ll'ij' 1:118 -.

'- 4 .:::. sumo .

'r' ._ .c- .ULIJ-‘XI 10¢

v . 17.1111: ‘.

.. . .1. *5 '.' Nanak .; '1

i v .3314: 1130a".
' ‘ c1ev' ‘ "eh? I

c \ C J.
, e .
win so
' LL,
. s. 5..
. .. -- .._

f '/K f
..r. (....l
. exc-aw .
-. c ' Lira...
--‘ - r {Y 3M ..
.
I £32!-

1 - 3 "Hrs Ui- . ‘ _3
.* bf;

. - r02

'1 '1". 9.181%

,I {45]. .
,f»

4

 

‘ - no» '.
’ ,1; f .1158 mg»? ',
“‘1 :1351'1551 .IB'

 

392

You and I have so much in common, haven't we? Then do welcome
him as you would welcome me. If you feel he has wronged or
cheated you put it down to my account. I've written this with my
own hand: I, Paul, hereby promise to repay you. (Ofcourse,

I'm not stressing the fact that you might be said to owe me your
very soul'.) Now do grant me this favour, my brother-~such an
act of love will do my old heart good. As I send you this letter I
know you'll do what 1 ask. '

The Apostle now reaches the height of his appeal. He reasons
from analogy when he suggests that Philemon Should consider what
treatment he would give the Apostle, and then transfer the same attitude
to Onesimus. It is intimated that their own close friendship made the
granting of his request a reasonable and probable procedure. Further-
more, as regards what haS been stolen, Philemon need not fear the loss
of that, for Paul is prepared to pay it back if so required. None the
less he reminds Philemon that it is he who actually is Paul's debtor.

As though writing a promissory note, Paul borrows the quill from his
amanuensis, and writes the fact that he is prepared to replenish the

amount stolen.

It does not follow from this sentence that the whole of this Epistle
was written with the Apostle' s own hand; rather it would seem,
that he made this engagement of repayment to be more emphatic
and significant by distinguishing it from the rest of the Epistle,
and by taking the pen from the hand of his secretary, and by
inditing that particular clause with his own autograph, well known
to Philemon.‘Z (emphasis his)

 

There is an interesting transition inverse nineteen, where the Apostle
adds to his promise the words--"to say nothing of your owing me even
your own self. "

Here St. Paul escapes from the business-like promise of the
last verse in the freer atmosphere of Spiritual relations. He
knew that this promise it was right for him to offer, but wrong

 

lPhillips, verses 17-20.
ZWordsworth, p. 339.

e-

, .-

 

rvrs ..

o... _. _..

uln- A

N‘ump‘ ' .

..1 cifl ' : inseam ’-

"w L 5.30--
.“V

   
  
   
  
   
  
  

3i inquo
{Ir/2". ,I ":1:

r i": (If

e . ;. Mow -'

_. L‘A-L'l :11 .45.

IiiC‘i

L‘.‘ l'.I.,£.' (LO 5 \i;
. 7.2L:J £4de ..‘

V L" 31.1193? V.
to ozii 3n
.nr first, 3 -

T.
. ‘ . "Uf
,3 ;-ru.taa N." :f ‘

393

for Philemon to accept. Philemon owed his own self- -his new
self in Christ--to the Apostle. In that was a debt which he
could not repay, but would rejoice even in this smaller matter
to acknowledge. 1

The letter continues:

Confident of your obedience, I write to you, knowing that you
will do even more than I say. 2

Here is another transition, this time a transition in tone. Almost
imperceptibly the Apostle has glided from the tone of appeal to a friend
to that of authority from a superior. He refers now to "obedience. "
Nothing is being left to chance. Paul has appealed to the love of Philemon
for himself and for the God he worshipped. Now he adds a delicate
allusion to the fact that Philemon's deference for his apostleship will
confirm his desire to comply with the request. By the reference to
Philemon's doing even more than requested it is gently suggested once
more that not only should the slave be kindly received but he] should be
given his freedom.

At the same time, prepare a guest room for me, for I am
h0ping through your prayers to be granted to you.3

Almost as a postscript Paul adds these words. The words do not
in themselves imply that the guest room should be at Philemon's own
home. The Greek word here used often signifies "hOSpitality" generally,
and the sentence itself literally interpreted is only a request that
Philemon arrange some particular place for Paul. Nevertheless, both
Philemon and theApostle were aware that it would be natural for the
former to offer such hOSpitality in his own house. The implication of
the request is that when Paul appears on Philemon's doorstep (if he
Should be released from prison), he would want to know the condition

of the slave, as well as that of his host.

‘Berry, 'Ellicottp p. 274.
2RSV, v. 21.
BRSV, v. 22.

 

   

’Ilu

0.. .1.
....
m
n. L
J . .lx
(It. .1
L -.
....m.
a ...

1A....v.

- - .
«-lteeF I0

. 1..
.I;‘. A

’—

:«bml'd ‘ .

h

u: a;.'.’

. r

1,.
rr‘.

O...r1...

.t n. ..6

it.

d‘l ,.

:le

A.
.v

    
 

J

5

34:! W‘Khld

4.13 a .121 atfil ' "

, 3' e'xiuaca

.’.~: >szer 31‘

'.':.¢ 5 mag .

1.1

"2.1" '3 {fl

7 r

2...

C

i. -_._.

 

394

It is doubtful whether the greatest living psychologist could
devise an entreaty half as powerful as that constituted by this letter.
It is a model of Christian courtesy and sweet reasonableness. The
logic of it is implicit rather than blatant and the Apostle refuses to

use arguments of a bludgeoning nature.

Analysis of Pathos

 

The very setting of this message has obvious pathetic factors
which aid the accomplishment of the Apostle's purpose. As has been
previously mentioned, the Apostle of the Gentiles, who for almost
thirty years had tirelessly proclaimed the gOSpel, wasnow confined to
a Roman prison, and chained to a Roman guard. That irreSponsible
enemy of the Christians, Nero, sat on the imperial throne, and the
Apostle had no natural grounds for expecting clemency. DeSpite the
exigency of his. Situation, Paul prosecuted his evangelistic work,
teaching the gospel to his Roman guards, and to visitors. In this letter
we find his heart so completely at rest from himself that he has set
himself the task of persuading the wronged Slavemaster to forgive the
Slave escapee. Considering the natural love that his converts held
fOr him, this present predicament of the Apostle's could not but in-
tensify their sympathies towards him. Probably from the very house-
hold of Philemon's there had arisen countless prayers on. behalf of the
prisoner's release.

Paul is not unaware of this situation as he faces the task of per-
suading Philemon regarding Onesimus. In the first line of his message
he makes reference to his situation. It is "Paul, a prisoner for Christ
Jesus" who addresses Philemon and the church at his houSe. Further
on in his address he refers to "Paul the aged and now also a priSoner"

(v 9 'KJV‘and RSV footnote). In verses 10, 13,3 and 23, his imprisonment .

395

is again mentioned. Undoubtedly Paul hopes to intensify the love and
sympathy of his hearers in order that Onesimus might share some of
the affection felt towards the Apostle. l The latter was aware that:

Mankind makes far more determinations through hatred, or
love, or desire, or anger, or grief, or joy, or hope, or fear,
or error, .or some other affection of mind, than from regard
to truth, or any settled maxim, or principles of right, or
judicial form, or adherence to the laws. 2

One of the most effective means of arousing emotion within an
audience is for the speaker to exhibit the emotions he desires to see in
others. This Paul does. His affection and sympathy pervade his
message, and there are no indications that these are synthetic. He ap-
pears to do naturally that which great actors feign. Note, for example,
his use of the word ”love" throughout the letter. Consider also the
description of his prayers in verses 4-7. The manner in which he
identifies the Slave with himself is the strongest of all demonstrations
in the letter of the Apostle's expansive affections and sympathies.
Philemon is ever addressed with courtesy and affection (see for example
verses 2, 4-7, 14).

The third aSpect of pathetic appeal in his address is the stress
upon religious beliefs. Luther caught this emphasis and expressed it
as follows:

This Epistle showeth a right, noble, lovely example of Christian
love. Here we see how St. Paul layeth himself out for the poor
Onesimus, and with all his means pleadeth his cause with his
master, and so setteth himself as if he were Onesimus, and had
himself done wrong to Philemon. Yet all this doeth he, not with

 

lThese passages obviously have strong ethical as well as pathetic
appeal.

2Cicero, De Oratore 11:42.

 

396

force, as if he had right thereto, but he stripped himself of his
right, and thus enforceth Philemon to forego his right also.
Even as Christ did for us with God the Father, thus also doth
St. Paul for Onesimus with Philemon: for Christ also stripped
Himself of His right, and by love and humility enforced (?) the
Father to lay aside His wrath and power, and to take us to His
grace for the sake of Christ, who lovingly pleadeth our cause,
and with all His heart layeth Himself out for us; for we are all
His Onesimi, to my thinking. 1

Thus does Paul build upon the beliefs of his listeners regarding
Christian virtues. They already believe that love is the Sign of true
discipleship. He exhorts that this Sign be now diSplayed. Philemon
believes in the Christian ethic of forgiveness. Paul urges that he now
manifest it. Each of these Colossian believers names himself as a
brother to all other believers. Paul suggests that the present case will
put their "brotherliness" to the test. Furthermore, Philemon and his
house acknowledge that a Supreme Providence overrules all the events
of this life. This too is made to minister to Paul's motivating appeal
(v. 15).

The Apostle also seeks to motivate in other ways than through
religious beliefs and altruism. In the following verses he appeals to
the desires for social status, group approval, gregariousness and
friendship (2, 5-7, 22-24). Humour is employed in the puns of verses
12 and 20, gratitude is appealed to in verse 19, emulation in verses
9-12. It may be said that verse 18 would be classified by some as an
appeal to acquisitiveness, but we doubt if the Apostle believed that
Philemon would accept the offer. It is rather a gesture of courtesy.
In verse 21 we have a further appeal to reputation, while verse 22 the
motive of self-preservation is applied.

The list of motives in these last paragraphs should not be con-

strued as constituting the primary pathetic appeal of this address.

 

1Luther, cited by Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown, Commentary
on the Whole Bible, p. 436.

 

 

397

They are secondary. Absolutely primary in this instance is the appeal
to the love em’sting between Paul and the believers, and the appeal to

religious beliefs.

Analysis of Ethos

 

One is accustomed to imagine the apostle as always armed for
war, loaded with logic and bristling with arguments. We like to
come upon him at rest, in a moment of relaxation in that inter-
course of friendship full of abandonment and even of playfulness. 1

It is obvious that ethical and pathetic appeals run parallel in
several places in this discourse. For example, the Situation of the aged
Apostle as a prisoner for Christ's sake has strong ethical as well as
pathetic overtones. Similarly, the Apostle's expressions of love were
not only calculated to create emotive responses but also to establish
convictions regarding his own good-will towards his hearers. As
Thonssen and Baird have written "ethos and pathos have, indeed, much

HZ

in common. We Shall now view the discourse with reference to mani-

fe stations of ethos .

 

Verse 1: Paul, a prisoner for Christ Jesus, and Timothy
our brother.3

The simple appellation of "Paul, " minus the usual addition of his
apostleship, is rich in ethical Significance. In effect it declares "Here
is a friendly letter. I forbare to use my official status because my
request is a personal one, and I trust you will listen to me as an equal
rather than as a church-leader. For friendship's sake consider this
appeal. " The salutation betokens good will and humility by its amiable

Simplicity. The eXpression "a prisoner for Christ Jesus" probably

 

lM. Sabatier, cited by F. Godet, in Introduction to the New
Testament, p. 460.

 

 

zThonssen and Baird, p. 386.
3RSV, verse 2.

398

conjured up in the minds of the hearers the picture of one who had
laboured long and well in the service of God, and who as a result was
imprisoned by the pagans. As the first part of the salutation suggested
character and good-will, this section indicates character and compe-
tence. The Roman government evidently views this prisoner with
reSpect. They have not killed him out of hand, and they have permitted
him the privilege of receiving and deSpatching messages.

Verse 2: To Philemon our beloved fellow worker . . . Grace
to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus
Christ. '

It is no mean accomplishment to write serenely regarding "grace
and peace" in full knowledge of the fact that at any moment one might be
called to place one's head on the executioner's block. The salutation
is affectionate as well as serene. It is as "our beloved fellow worker"
that Paul considers Philemon. The Speaker appears as one full of
good will with a heart at rest from himself. Consider, for example,
the following reference to hisintercession in prayer for Philemon.

Verses 4-7: I think my God always when I remember you in
my prayers, because I hear of your love and of the faith which
you have toward the Lord Jesus and all the saints, and I pray
that the Sharing of your faith may promote the knowledge of all
the good that is ours in Christ. For I have derived much joy
and comfort from your love, my brother, because the hearts
of the saints have been refreshed through you. 2

Not the least evidences of Paul's good character is manifested
in this letter are the constant religious allusions. In the words of
Thonssen and Baird he "associates . . . himself . . . [and] his message

with what is virtuous and elevated. "3 The Divine titles, religious

 

lRSV, verses 2, 3.
ZRSV, verses 4-7.
3Thonssen and Baird, p. 387.

399

practices or beliefs are alluded to in almost every verse. In this
section, for example, he refers to God, the Lord Jesus, love, faith,
prayer, service and hOSpitality. These verses not only suggest the
good character of Paul, but they portray his goodwill towards Philemon
and "all the saints. ”

Verses 8-10: Accordingly, though I am bold enough in Christ
to command you to do what is required, yet for love's sake I
prefer to appeal to you—-I, Paul, an ambassador and now a
prisoner also for Christ Jesus--I appeal to you for my child,
Onesimus, whose father I have become in my imprisonment. l

The reference to himself as "Paul the aged and now also a
prisoner" repeats the appeal made in the introduction. "Yet for love's
sake I prefer to appeal to you" is the language of tact and good-will.
This, and the many other indications of tact in the discourse, are mani-
festations of sagacity or competence.

. . . a Speaker helps to establish the impression of sagacity
if he (1) uses what is popularly called common sense; (2) acts
with tact and moderation; (3) diSplays a sense of good taste. . . .

Other indications of this are found in the Apostle's gradual
approach to the subject of his letter. He does not blurt out the name
of Onesimus with his first breath. Instead, the Slave iS not mentioned
till the message is almost half-way through. The appeal is not voiced
until indications of the Speaker's own affection for Philemon have been
thoroughly manifested. The language of entreaty is chosen rather than
that of authority. Paul professes confidence that his request will be
complied with (v. 21). All these are intimations of the "competence"
of Paul.

". . . my child, Onesimus, whose father I have become in my

imprisonment. " These words bear witness regarding each constituent

 

lRSV, verses 8-10.
ZThonssen and Baird, p. 387.

400

of ethos. Character is suggested, for here is a man still labouring

 

for others while in dire distress himself. Competence is indicated,
because the aged worker was able to convert even a recalcitrant Slave,
and this was accomplished in unfavourable surroundings. Thirdly,
good-will for all men is revealed, for it is evident that one who could
champion a representative of the dregs of society must have a great
affection for mankind.

Verse 11: (Formerly he was useless to you, but now he is
indeed useful to you and to me. )1

Most of us enjoy humor shown on a stage, but humor from a prison
is much more striking. AS has been mentioned, the meaning of Onesimus
is "useful. " We admire most the man who can be cheerful and even play-
ful when circumstances seem against him. And usually, believers are ~
relieved and encouraged when they find manifestations of their common
humanity in "great" leaders. Verse 20 repeats the pun in another way.

Verse 12: I am sending him back to you, sending my very
heart. 2

Here is the greatest Christian of the age referring to an escapee
Slave and thief as "his very heart. " To a thoughtful person the ethical
considerations suggested are powerful indeed.

Verses 13, 14: I would have been glad to keep him with me, in
order that he might serve me on your behalf during my imprison-
ment for the gospel; but I preferred to do nothing without your
consent in order that your goodness might not be by compulsion
but of your own free will.3

While he had every excuse to retain Onesimus, the Apostle refused
to do so. He will not take an unfair advantage to the slightest degree.

Verses 15, 16: Perhaps this is why he was parted from you for
a while that you might have him back forever, no longer a slave, . . .

 

'Rsv, verse 11.
zlbid., verse 12.

31bid. , verses 13, 14.

 

401

aS a beloved brother, eSpecially to me but how much more to
you, both in the flesh and in the Lord. 1

Paul is a believer in a Providence that does all things well. The
use of "beloved" once more Should be noted. In the introduction he
used the adjective with reference to the master. Here it is used con-
cerning the Slave.

Verses 17-20: So if you consider me your partner, receive him
as you would receive me. If he has wronged you at all, or owes
you anything, charge that to my account. I, Paul, write this
with my own hand, I will repay it--to say nothing of your owing
me even your own self. Yes, brother, I want some benefit from
you in the Lord. Refresh my heart in Christ. 2

Sympathy, generosity, and trust are indicated by these words.
The picture of the aged and worn prisoner offering recompense from
his own probably scant store has considerable ethical appeal.

Verses 21-22: Confident of your obedience, I write to you,
knowing that you will do even more than I say. At the same
time, prepare a guest room for me, for I am hoping through
your prayers to be granted to you.3

Paul expresses confidence in his "fellow worker" and hopefully
declares that he will visit him if the latter's prayers for his freedom
are answered. Thus the letter closes as it began, with emphasis upon
the intimate relationship existing between Paul and Philemon.

Reviewing the whole, we question whether any discourse of Similar
length has ever approached this one in its marvellous content of
personal resources.

. . . we may notice the beautiful light which this letter throws
upon the character of St. Paul. We see him here in private
life; in the sweet and genial intercourse which he held with the
friends whom he loved. We see how very far Christianity is

 

1Ibid., verses 15, 16.
21bid., verses 17-20.

3Ibid. , verses 21-22.

 

I:
e

'7

35

civsfl

'15!

N no: Inn“

7

d. rmqn

x
.4

H"!

€:'r~1'1flifl

c
v

1

';,':..' r1 :0)”

 

 

 

402

from interfering with the exquisite courtesies and refinements
of daily intercourse. We see--let us repeat it--in the best and
truest sense of the word what a gentleman Paul was. 1

Appendix to Section on Ethical Appeal

 

The closest known approach to Paul' 3 letter is another epistle
written by a contemporary concerning a runaway slave. This is the
famous letter of Pliny to Sabinianus. We include a translation of this
letter and a quotation concerning the contrast between its ethical mani-
festations and those of Paul's letter to Philemon.

"Ct. Plinius to his Sabinianus, greeting: --

Your freedman, with whom, as you had told me, you were
vexed, came to me, and, flinging himself at my feet, clung to
them as though they had been yours. He wept much, entreated
much, yet at the same time left much unsaid, and, in short, con-
vinced me that he was sincerely sorry. I believe that he is really
reformed, because he is now conscious of his delinquency. You
are angry, I know; justly angry, that too I know; but gentleness
is most praiseworthy exactly where anger is most justifiable.
You loved the poor fellow, and I hOpe will love him again; mean-
while, it is enough to yield to intercession. Should he ever
deserve it you may be angry again, and all the more excusably by
yielding now. Make some allowance for his youth, for his tears,
for your own kindly diSposition. Do not torture him, lest you
torture yourself as well, for it is a torture to you when one of
your kindly nature is angry. I fear you will think that I am not
asking but forcing you if I join my prayers to his; I will, however,
do so, and all the more fully and unreservedly in proportion to the
Sharpness and severity with which I took him to task, sternly
threatening that I would never say a word for him again. That I
Said to him because he needed to be well frightened; but I do not
say it to you, for perhaps I shall say a word for him again, and
again gain my point; provided only my request be such as it
becomes me to ask and you to grant. Farewell'. 2

 

lFarrar, St. Paul, p. 349.
21bid., p. 734.

i
1'3 v. 3

'. 111!
, {11:85

' has;

‘r '3:

 

E b
7. L66

0
;.' 3.? "{38

"J

‘r

 

 

 

403

That exquisitely natural and beautifully-written letter does credit
both to Pliny's heart and to his head, and yet polished as it is in
style, while St. Paul's is written with a sort of noble carelessness
of expression, it stands for beauty and value far below the letter
to Philemon. In the first place, it is for a young freedman who
had been deeply beloved, and not for a runaway Slave. In the next
place, it is purely individual, and wholly wanting in the large
divine principle which underlies the letter of St. Paul. And there
are other marked differences. Paul has no doubt whatever about
the future good conduct of Onesimus; but Pliny thinks that the young
freedman may offend again. Pliny assumes that Sabinianus is

and will be angry; Paul has no such fear about Philemon. Paul
pleads on the broad ground of Humanity redeemed in Christ; Pliny
pleads the youth and the tears of the freedman, and the affection
which his master once felt for him. Paul does not think it necessary
to ask Philemon to Spare punishment; Pliny has to beg his friend
not to use torture. Paul has no reproaches for Onesimus; Pliny
severely scolded his young suppliant, and told him--without mean-
ing to keep his word--that he should never intercede for him again.
The letter of Pliny is the letter of an excellent Pagan; but the
differences which separate the Pagan from the Christian stand out
in every line. 1

 

Analysis of Arrangement

 

Throughout the preceding analysis, mention has been made of the
psychological arrangement of Paul's materials in this discourse. We
would now summarise the evidence which leads us to this conclusion.

Obviously the arrangement is informal in pattern. It is neither
historical, distributive, or logical. If any adjective is to be applied
it is the word "psychological. " By psychological arrangement we mean
an ordering of ideas that takes fully into account the motives, emotions,
and prejudices of the listeners and is calculated to apply, convert, or
allay these reSpectively during the process of persuasion. Its external

arrangement is that of most New Testament letters plus the typical

 

lIbid., pp. 627-628.

404

section of thanksgiving which almost invariably accompanies a Pauline
epistle. Thus we have:

(1) Salutation--verses 1-3.

(2) Thanksgiving--verses 4-7.

(3) Body—-verses 8-20. In this instance the body is constituted

of intercession for the runaway Slave.

(4) Conclusion and farewell--verses 21-25.

The most Significant feature of the arrangement is that Paul with
great courtesy and tact prepares the way for his ultimate plea of
"receive him." These words occur in the 17th verse after Paul has
(1) alluded to his own position as a prisoner, (2) expressed his love for
Philemon and the church which met at his house, (3) indicated the provi-
dential purpose in the flight of Onesimus, and (4) intimated that the
slave is now a changed man. The very name of the runaway is withheld
until the Apostle is almost half-way through his letter.

Even in single verses the arrangement of the words is often
Significant. In verse 10, for example, it has been pointed out that the
name Onesimus is restricted in the original Greek to the very last
place in the sentence. Paul first calls him "his child" and affirms
that he has Spiritually sired him while prisoner and then, and not till
then, he pronounces the word--Onesimus.

For aninformal friendly address that has nevertheless a very
definite purpose of persuasion, it is doubtful whether the arrangement

could be greatly improved. 1

Results

Nowhere in Scripture do we have a direct statement concerning

the results of this letter. Tradition, however, suggests that the letter -

 

'The style of Philemon is Specifically discussed in chapter six.

405

was successful in its purpose. Onesimus has been identified both as
a later bishop of Ephesus (not far from Colosse), and of Beroea. At
least two of the ancient manuscripts of this letter add the postscript
that Onesimus was ultimately martyred at Rome by having both of his
legs broken upon the rack.

The fact also, that the Epistle to Philemon was communi-
cated by him to the Church of his own City, and was publicly
read in the Church in the age of Philemon, and has continued to
be so read to this day, authorizes us to conclude, that the hOpeS
of the Apostle were realized, that his petition was granted, and
that the Christian slave Onesimus was welcomed as a brother
by his Christian master Philemon, and by the Christian Church
of Colosse.

This conclusion is confirmed by the circumstance already
mentioned, that the house of Philemon at Colosse, to which
Onesimus returned, was long afterwards pointed out to the
affectionate memory of the faithful. 1

It is the long range effect of this epistle that we consider to be
the most significant. It played a prominent part in the work of slave-
emancipation. William Wilberforce and almost every chief anti-
Slavery agitator used Philemon as one of his strongest arguments.
Granted that the letter does not condemn slavery, it does however sug-
gest principles which, once accepted, cause slavery to fall. By
christianizing the master, the GosPel has enfranchised the Slave, and

it is this discourse which best demonstrates the process.

 

'Wordsworth, p. 335.

CHAPTER VI

THE STYLE OF THE DISCOURSES

As mentioned in the introduction to the analyses contained in
Chapter V, the detailed discussion of Paul's style has been reserved
for separate treatznent. This analysis, therefore, is the complement
of the preceding chapter by virtue of its purpose to give attention to

the canon of style.

 

We would first ask such questions as: What is style? Do the
ancients and the moderns agree in their concepts regarding it?) Are
there some prerequisites and some constituents of style which are
agreed upon by the majority of Speech critics?

The ancients appear to have given more attention to defining the
elements of style than in suggesting a comprehensive definition of
style itself. Thomas Wilson included in the first comprehensive
treatment of rhetoric in our language this definition: "Elocution, is
an appliyng of apte woordes and sentences to the matter, founde out
to confirme the cause. . "1 In the eighteenth century, however, we
find the following:

Eloquence hath always been considered, and very justly,
as having a particular connexion with language. It is the in-
tention of eloquence to convey our sentiments into the minds
of others, in order to produce a certain effect upon them.
Language is the only vehicle by which this conveyance can be

 

1Cited in Selected Readings in Rhetoric and Public Speaking,
edited by Lester Thonssen (New York: The H. W. Wilson Company,
1942), p. 175.

406

407

made. The art of Speaking, then, is not less necessary to the
orator than the art of thinking. Without the latter, the former
could not have existed; without the former, the latter would be

ineffective. 1

It could justly be deduced from these words that style is the manner
whereby thought is expressed in language in order to produce a certain
effect upon listeners or readers.

Hugh Blair was more Specific. He affirmed concerning style:

The best definition I can give of it is, the peculiar manner
in which a man expresses his conceptions, by means of Language.
It is different from mere Language or words. The words which
an author employs, may be proper and faultless; and his Style
may, nevertheless, have great faults: it may be dry or stiff, or
feeble, or affected. Style has always some reference to an
author's manner of thinking. It is a picture of the ideas which
rise in his mind, and of the manner in which they rise there;
and, hence, when we are examining an author's composition,
it is, in many cases, extremely difficult to separate the style
from the sentiment. No wonder these two Should be so inti-
mately connected, as Style is nothing else than that sort of
expression which our thoughts most readily assume.z

We would Specially note in this definition the statement that
"style has always some reference to an author's manner of thinking."
Thus Blair intimates that there is a very close connection between style
and invention. Indeed, it is possible that an attempt to discuss style
on its own is an attempt to separate the inseparable. Certain it is that
there can be no great style without great thoughts. Adequate invention
is the primary underlying requirement (not "characteristic") of style.
If we accept the theory that we think in words, the relationship between

style and invention is even more apparent.

 

1George Campbell, The Philosophy of Rhetoric (New York:
Harper and Brothers, 1871), p. 162.

zThonssen, Selected Readings, p. 251.

408

"Longinus" at the beginning of the Christian era made a compre-
hensive statement regarding the sources of style which further illus—
trates this issue.

First and most important is vigor of mental conception. . . .
Second is strong and inspired emotion. Both of these are for
the most part innate diSpositionS. The others are benefited
also by artistic training. They are: the adequate fashioning of
figures (both of Speech and of thought), nobility of diction which
in turn includes the choice of words and the use of figurative
and artistic language; lastly, and including all the others,
dignified and distinguished word arrangement.

. . our first source of greatness-J mean natural high-minded-
neSS--is the most important. It is inborn rather than acquired,
but we must nevertheless educate the mind to greatness as far
as possible and impregnate it, as it were, with a noble exaltation.
. . . a true writer's mind can be neither humble nor ignoble.
Men whose thoughts and concerns are mean and petty throughout
life cannot produce anything admirable or worthy of lasting fame.
The authors of great works are endowed with dignity of mind,
and literary excellence belongs to those of high Spirit.1

It would appear that while style is vitally connected with the
Speaker's manner of thought, in its manifested form it has to do with
the choice of words and the shaping of clauses and sentences. The

ancients applied the term ekloye (electio) to word choice, and sunthesis

 

(compositio) to the structuring of clauses etc. Ancient and modern
rhetoricians seem agreed on these points.

What then are the chief attributes of good style? Since the days
of Theophrastus, four basic qualities have been repeatedly set forth--
correctness, clearness, ornateness, and prOpriety. All four apply to

both the choice of words and their arrangement.

 

1Longinus (?), On Great Writing (On the Sublime), trans. by
G. M. A. Grube (New York: The Liberal Arts Press, 1957), 8, 9.

 

409

Let us now turn to consider the style of the Apostle Paul.
Certainly there iS none other that resembles it, for present in all
Paul's addresses are abundant stylistic evidences of an intense
individuali sm .

Casaubon said of this ancient missionary that he alone of
writers seems to have written not with pen and ink, but with his very
heart, his very feelings, and the unbared palpitations of his inmost
being. 1 Jerome asserted that the words of the letters are like so
many thunders, and Luther declared that Paul's expressions were both
battles and like living creatures with hands and feet. Erasmus wrote
that Paul "thunders and lightens and Speaks Sheer flame, " and Norden
suggested that in him the language of the heart is born again. The
latter adds "How this language of the heart must have rung into the
souls of men accustomed to the silly volubility of the s0phists. "2

If he staggers under the greatness of his subject, if he is dis-
tracted by the infinity of the interests which he treats, if every
word which rises to his lips suggests a host of profound and
large associations, if the care of all the Churches, gives all
the facts a varied but a real significance. . . . Human Speech
must be blamed for its poverty; human experience, which has
develOped Speech, for its narrowness. His life was ever in
his hand, his heart was on his lips. The heart was often too
great for the Speech.3

What can be more free and buoyant, with all their variety, than
his writings? Brilliant, broken, impetuous as the mountain
torrent freshly filled, never smooth and calm but on the eve of
some bold leap, never vehement but to fill some receptacle of
clearest peace, they present everywhere the image of a vigorous
joy. Beneath the forms of their theos0phic reasonings, and their
hints of deep philOSOphy, there may be heard a secret lyric strain

 

1See Farrar, St. Paul, pp. 689-690 for this and the following
quotations in the original languages.

2T. R. Glover, Paul of Tarsus (New York George H. Doran
Company, 1930), p. 194.

3Farrar, St. Paul, p. 690.

 

 

All i
Lia 3‘
.w
n . ....
I .... a .c
w.
n
.
.
\
.
1 O
......55 - ..
1.11%.! . ..-

'9
‘5
..v,V.
2.. .. .
.
\I
'\|
’u
.47.

l 1.1” "

ll'

. .
.9) .

avoid .

4
x a

.q .691“:

     

.dfvfln
.'. '11

a .I.
,a

r.

I...

U.

.

 

410

of glorious praise, bursting at times into Open utterance, and
asking others to join the chorus. . . . His life was a battle
from which in intervals of the good fight, his words arose as
the song of victory.1

As these last lines indicate, the cause of Paul's unique style was
his unique life and character. In harmony with the truism that "style
is the man" it can be said that no man has ever written like the Apostle,
because no writer has ever lived as he did. Zeal, energy, faith, love,
humility, and genius characterized the life of the Apostle to the Gentiles;
and inevitably the imprint of all these is to be found upon his inimitable
style.

The Epistles marvellously reflect his personality. It has been
said of one of the great painters that he was wont to mix his
colours with blood drawn from a secret wound; and of Paul it
may be said that he dipped his pen in the blood of his heart.
Whatever impression had last rested on his sensitive nature
coloured the flow of his thoughts and expressions, whether it
was Philippian love expressed by the coming of Epaphroditus, or
the story of the Corinthian division told by the members of the
house of Chloe. Probably it is for this very reason, because he
wrote with all the freshness of Speech, with the Sparkle of con-
versation, as though he were talking naturally in a circle of
friends, that he has so moved the heart of the world.2

It should not be conceived that all critics are alike in their praise
of Paul's style. This is not the case. It has been pointed out times
without number that Paul's grammar is often faulty, that he is frequently
guilty of anacolutha, that some of his sentences seem interminably long,
and that others seem beyond comprehension. Charles Edward Jefferson
was aware of all this when he wrote the following.

The controversy over Paul's style is interminable, and the dis-
heartening fact is that the Greek Specialists have neiver been able
to agree. To the present hour, it is an open question among

 

lMartineau, quoted by Farrar, ibid.

 

2F. B. Meyer, Paul a Servant of Jesus Christ (London: Morgan
and Scott, n. d.), p. 178.

 

411

those best qualified to pass judgment, whether Paul's style is
literary or not. One may says he writes like Thucydides,
while another declares that he violates audaciously not only the
genius of the Greek language, but the logic of human speech.

But the thing of importance to mankind about his style is
not its literary qualities, but its power to carry us into the
heart of the writer. In his style, we feel the heartbeat of the
man. His style is rapid, it sweeps along like a prairie fire,
like a swollen torrent. It has been described as 'a rapid conver-
sation taken down by a stenographer, and reproduced without
corrections! It is fortunate that no corrections were made.
In his unstudied and Spontaneous use of language, we get the man
Paul as he was.

. . . . He was a man of action and hence had little liking for the
refinements and embellishments of the rhetorical school. 1

He was a practical worker in the everyday world, and not a monk
in a cell or an anchorite in a cave. . . . He was quick in his
every movement, and the Spirit of headlong haste is in his style.
He had no time to be careful even‘of grammar. When grammar
got in his way, he smashed it. 2

Stalker, one of the greatest New Testament scholars, regards
Paul's style in a similar way.

It cannot be maintained that Paul's Epistles are models of style.
They were written far too hurriedly for this; and the last thing

he thought of was to polish his periods. Often, indeed, his ideas,
by the mere virtue of their fineness and beauty, run into forms

of exquisite language, or there is in them such a sustained throb
of emotion that they shape themselves Spontaneously into sentences
of noble eloquence. But oftener his language is rugged. . . .3

A different viewpoint, however, is the following:

Paul has repeatedly been reproached with the rudeness of
his constructions, the occasional clumsiness of his sentences,
his barbarous Greek generally. His critics have undoubtedly

 

1Jefferson probably has in mind the degenerate rhetoric of the
age of the Second SOphistic.

2C. E. Jefferson, The Character of Paul (New York: Macmillan
Company, 1923), p. 381.

3Stalker, p. 92.

 

‘ 1‘>;l 11‘"

1.3....

.... 8

rl a

a... w

;. ... ,.
... H-

t .

a

o

J

l-IA.

in Jrl-'

3 rice"
r 1 “@101qu .-,_

I
L

1:124 11:1

.)

L

».r ( £39112

(

L

   

'J.-t;i:irr:8 u..'..;'

   

 

412

erred on the side of severity; for his letters bear the stamp
of good literature in their essential qualities. . . . and no
one can charge any letter of the apostle's with the most
serious fault of dullness. Paul is always interesting and
constantly uses phrases which have stood the test of time,
and have become the commonplaces of all subsequent
literature. 1

Yet another point of view comes from an eminent scholar of the

Greek originals.

It is a style far too vivid, far too swayed and penetrated by
personal emotion, to have admitted of being polished into
conformity with the artificial standards and accuracies of the
schools. . . . That many defects in it can be pointed out is
certain; but then in one important point of view these defects
are better than any beauties, because they are due to Paul's
individuality. In whole sections of his Epistles his very want
of style is his style. His style, like that of every great man,
has the defects of its qualities. "Le style, " said Buffon, not
(as he is usually quoted) c'est l'homme, but "c'est de l'homme. "
He has, as every great writer has, "1e style de sa pensee;"
he has the style of genius, if he has not the genius of style.‘2

Because this life-long student of the writings of Paul summarizes in '
a superior way certain of the characteristic features of Paul's style
he is quoted at length. Farrar's conclusions, unlike those of many
others who write concerning the Apostle, are firsthand, springing
from long and intensive study of the epistles in Greek.

That he could when he chose wield a style of remarkable finish
and eloquence without diminishing his natural intensity, is proved
by the incessant assonances and balances of clauses and expres-
sions (parechesis, parisosis, paromoiosis) in such passages as

2 Cor 6:3-11. And yet such is his noble carelessness of outward
graces of style, and his complete subordination of mere elegance
of exPression to the purpose of expressing his exact thought, that
he never shrinks, even in his grandest outbursts of rhythmic

 

1F. J. Foakes Jackson, The Life of Saint Paul (New York: Boni
and Liveright, 1926), p. 275.

zFarrar, St. Paul, pp. 691-692.

 

 

3r 311431 ;

.:,"1!Y,(J.'.

' l at! .- _-
’.L-1 ‘-

imL‘Kr -.‘i

t

-‘———- “...---

0.411114
7"

‘~.—.-..."- _..

_ L kph ‘. '6 1
..'. Hz. US v -
(:titrm
. . n .‘l‘fi'r'_
.: ;. Jud ml
.3 'laflzwd;
.‘ffliwuhh' :‘
115 Lil (aha-)-
. L '
£401. Offl. .
. . 1
_ 1.: n 810"
_..i'.L "..)”. .8515.
L. ”:3" will a -' I

Li - .:‘-Int; -
w. ;./ .' inward
' Libs: . .
. If I-zh'
clips 1;:
‘ > .
trio "3 m farts

 

413

eloquence, from the use of a word, however colloquial, which
expresses his exact shade of meaning.

All that has been written of the peculiarities of St. Paul's
style may, I think, be summed up in two words--Intense
Individuality. His style is himself. His natural temperament,
and the circumstances under which that temperament found its
daily sphere of action; his training, both Judaic and Hellenistic;
his conversion and sanctification, permeating his whole life
and thoughts--these united make up the Paul we know. And each
of these has exercised a marked influence on his style.

1. The absorption in the one thought before him, which
makes him state without any qualification truths which, taken in
the whole extent of his words, seem mutually irreconcilable;
the dramatic, rapid, overwhelming series of questions, which
show that in his controversial passages he is always mentally
face to face with an objection; the centrifugal force of mental
activity, which drives him into incessant digressions and goings
off at a word, due to his vivid power of realisation; the centripetal
force of imagination, which keeps all these digressions under the
control of one dominant thought; the grand confusions of metaphor;
the vehemence which makes him love the most emphatic com-
pounds; the irony and sarcasm; the chivalrously delicate courtesy;
the overflowing sympathy with the Jew, the Pagan, the barbarian--
with saint and sinner, king and slave, man and woman, young and
old; the passion, which now makes his voice ring with indignation
and now break with sobs; the accumulation and variation of words,
from a desire to set forth the truths which he is proclaiming in
every possible light; the emotional emphasis and personal
references of his style; the depressed humility passing into bound-
less exultation;--all these are due to his natural temperament,
and the atmOSphere of controversy and Opposition on the one hand,
and deep affection on the other, in which he worked.

2. The rhetorical figures, play of words, assonances,
oxymora, antitheses, of his style, . . .; the constant widening of
his horizon; the traceable influence of cities, and even of personal
companions, upon his vocabulary; the references to Hellenic life;
the method of quoting Scripture; the Rabbinic style of exegesis,

. . . --these are due to his training at Tarsus and Jerusalem, his
life at Corinth, Ephesus, and Rome.

3. The daring faith which never dreads a difficulty; the
unsolved antinomies, which, though unsolved, do not trouble him;
"the bold soaring dialectics with which he rises from the forms
of one finite and earthly thought to the infinite and spiritual life
embodied in them;" the "language of ecstacy, " which was to him,

 

 

 

 

ugl'uutl

hunt,”

v

u-JHL .

'..
.I."
.‘ w.) ".IJIV

'. '15 ~10 a);

v

;F_(,&ifi‘n. 1.; ‘.

.Pp‘.‘

"Ti-m?) .'

,
u

H ...-It! A

0“

      
     

414

as he meant it to be to his converts, the language of the work-

day world; that "transcendental-absurd" as it seems to the

world, which was the very life both of his conscience and
intellect, and made him what he was; the way in which, as with
one powerful sweep of the wing, he passes from the pettiest
earthly contentions to the spiritual and the infinite; the "shrink-
ing infirmity and self-contempt, hidden in a sort of aureole of
revelation, abundant beyond measure"--this was due to the fact
that his citizenship was in heaven, his life bid with Christ in God.1

Paul's mastery of language is commended by this writer (Farrar)
and other, though not all, scholars of the Greek New Testament concur.
A typical statement from one such is the following.

That . . . he had at command no small part of the treasuries of
the Greek language, is evident from his great variety of particles;
his significant variation of prepositions, which he knows how to
employ so as to be a true means of conveying thought; his copious
use of synonyms; his great variety of expressions for one and the
same object; his employment of rare words, and partly of words
coined by himself; his rich participial constructions, but eSpecially
his copious fulness of paronomasia in all its forms; the antanchlasis,
parachesis, annominatio. Without directing the mind expressly to
this subject, one cannot imagine how frequently the apostle uses
the paronomasia. For managing the figure in a free and Spirited
way, however, anunembarrassed use of the language is indiSpens-
able.2

From Paul's own day to the present time, his style has been
responsible for much interested comment. To balance the compara-
tively modern expressions already given, we would notice a few state-
ments that were made prior to the end of the fifth century.

The first judgment, that is known to us, concerning the
character of the style of Paul, was contained in the lost work of
Irenaeus, On the Pauline Inversions, where with entire correct-
ness he pronounced the ground of them to be, ”the rapidity of
his speech and the vehemence of his Spirit. ”3

 

 

lFarrar, St. Paul, pp. 692-693.

2A. Tholuck, Remarks on the Life, Character, and Style of the
Apostle Paul (Edinburgh: Thomas Clark, 1840), p. 24.

31bid., p. 32.

 

 

-..-.“_- -.- —r‘ ‘—

t *'
s -
E

 

    
     
   
  
  
  
  
   
  
 
 
  
   
  

ad | 3 mi. in, ‘
1.x?" Jul? :5,
{.7 r‘, If I“
U ,.L , r. u ‘ '.‘
I; ”(335 ',
, f’? Litton. -
. gums.
‘ ‘ ri.‘ u I‘;('i‘ ‘
,;.:.i3.'crg‘an'.

A;,.J;'JIL J”!
, ; . : tr- unit-lg;
flatbmi‘

.I-

1, .:' ,2 :010‘ .
.ilirvpjt“

- , ' .. p8 ‘ ) ‘~
. l v!) 1 ,
i u . Li_(!h b- “
i '. . ll. ‘(d . ,. i. .I.,
-' Chow -- IV

, .3169 "
.-_~ e gut-53mm l"
.7 4: ): MILL): :-
, o‘ISWO' If

~'.'JIJ.(3‘I
- ll. ii'!r!(x’10‘£";-

J' .
‘ ’ .
_«; , ..‘“1({‘J.'£J n, .1! ’.'

u" mailed
..,. an: 10
U"- ! {7'3 {$0 “.- _': '-

Lleil-VJ‘JE—I-Lg'léi' ..
i (I: iris a:

5 [hr '5’ '-
2.1.-..w‘ y f

" v
, . I?
,L _5 7],. ‘ig .:‘?!"

415

Dionysius Longinus thus speaks of the eloquence of Paul; "The
following men are the boast of all eloquence, and of Grecian
genius, viz. Demosthenes, Lysias, Aeschines, Hyperides,
Isaeus, Anarchus, or Demosthenes Crithinus, Isocrates, and
Antiphon, to whom may be added Paul of Tarsus, who was the
first within my knowledge, that did not make use of demonstra-
tion, " who made use of persuasion and pathos rather than

argument. 1

In the fourth book of Christian Instruction, Augustine has much
to say concerning the style of Paul. He cites Galatians 4:21-26 and
3: 15-22 as examples of the plain style; 1 Timothy 5:1 f, Romans 12:1,
6-16, 13:6-8, 12.-14 for the moderate style; and 2 Corinthians 6:2-11,
Galatians 4:10-20 as expressions of the grand style. Other passages
also from the epistles are discussed by Augustine as illustrations of
eloquence. For example, commenting on 2 Corinthians 11:16-30, he
says:

. . . how wisely and how eloquently he speaks'. He is the com-
panion of wisdom and the leader of eloquence. The former he
follows; for the latter, he leads the way, not Spurning it, how-
ever, when it chooses to follow him. . . . Attentive souls can
see how much wisdom is in these words. Even one who is deep
in sleep can observe also with what a noble flow of eloquence
they rush on. 2

Let us now consider certain characteristics of Paul's style which
are repeatedly mentioned by commentators on the epistles. They include
the following:

1. The use of Koiné rather than of classical Greek.

2. Economy and profundity of expression, with frequent

 

1Ibid. p. 39. This statement is cited to indicate the influence of
Paul's eloquence rather than to endorse its concluding affirmation. As
can be seen by reference to the analysis of Galatians, logical argument
is a strong feature of the Apostle's discourses.

zAugustine. Christian Instruction, trans. by John G. Gavigan,
Vol. IV of The Fathers of the Church. Edited by Ludwig SChOpp e_t a_._1. ,
72 vols. (New York: Lima Publishing Company, Inc., 1947), p. 178.

 

 

416

concise epitomies.

Intensity of expression, revelatory of ardour and power.

Eloquent climaxes achieved through the Grand style.

Occasional ellipses, digressions, and obscurities.

Courtesy, intimacy, affection, and authority.

Frequent dialectical approach.

Liberal use of TrOpes and Figures.

C'Opious vocabularly and richness of expression.

OxOCDKIO‘U‘II-fi-UJ

...:

An overall approach towards language which was in strong

contrast to that shown by contemporary stylists of the Second
SOphistic.
We would now proceed to give examples from the epistles of these

characteristics. Such examples will be typical rather than exhaustive.

1. The Use of Koiné Rather Than of Classical Greek

 

The Apostle aspired after intelligibility in preference to classic
purity. Perhaps it was for this reason that he did not endeavor to c0py
the learned Greek authors in their use of the Attic dialect. Instead he
chose to use the simpler vernacular form which is called the Koiné, or
"common" dialect. One example of the difference may be perceived in

such passages as 1 Cor. 7:29; 9: 18 where the use of hina clauses

 

reveals a much wider significance than merely the Classical purpose
clause. The Greek of the New Testament is identical with that on
recently discovered papyri of the first century, even though the bulk of
the latter deals with such prosaic matters as buying, selling, and

travelling .

2. Economy and Profundity of Expression, with
Frequent Concise Epitomies.

A. reader or listener has at each moment but a limited amount of
mental power available. To recognise and interpret the symbols

417

presented to him requires part of this power; to arrange and
combine the images suggested requires a further part; and
only that part which remains can be used for the realization

of the thought conveyed. Hence, the more time and attention
it takes to receive and understand each sentence, the less time
and attention can be given to the contained idea; and the less
vividly will that idea be conceived. 1

In these words Herbert Spencer set forth that principle of style
which can be called the principle of economy of effort. Because Paul
was by nature a clear thinker, he never permitted words or phrases
that were ”hazy" in meaning to clutter the revelation of key thoughts, 2
and thus he fulfilled the law suggested above deSpite his occasional
expression of an apparently involved thought. Consider for example
the simple ensuing description of epochal events.

. . . since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so,
through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen
asleep. For this we declare to you by the word of the Lord, that
we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord,
shall not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord
himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with
the archangel's call, and with the sound of the trumpet of God,
And the dead in Christ will rise first; then we who are alive,
who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds
to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the
Lord. 1 Thess 4:14-18 RSV

Readily recognizable in this, as in other Pauline passages, are
the characteristics of correctness and perSpicuity. The Greek words
employed are those which were readily understood by even the children
of that day. It is also evident that Paul here and elsewhere used
apparently simple words as the elements of profound expressions. For

example, how much was meant to the early Christians by the reference

 

1Cited in Thonssen's Selected Readings, p. 303.

 

2It is true, however, that anacolutha can be found in the compo-
sition of some of the Apostle's subsidiary ideas.

 

418

to "the dead in Christ'". Hence, while even the children knew the
meaning of each word in this instance, not even the adults could
plumb all that was comprehended by this expression. In another
passage on the same subject we find a similar example of simplicity
and profundity united. "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ
shall all be made alive. " 1 Cor: 15:22. Theologians have written
innumerable volumes in their attempts to depth the meaning of this
sentence. It comprehends within itself a large number of the basic
doctrines of the Christian faith, such as Original Sin, the Atonement,

the Second Advent, the Resurrection, and Immortality.

 

 

As has been already mentioned, we owe to the Apostle hundreds
of ideas never mentioned before. Christian creeds and religious
literature reflect in profuse variety the seminal thoughts of Paul.

Such beliefs as the resurrection of the dead, the end of the age at the

 

return of Christ, the duties of universal Christian love, and conformity

 

to the divinely ordained civil power within its Sphere, as well as 331.
unprecedented emphasis upon Jewish ethics are due in large part to the
instrumentality of Paul.

Consider the impact of the concise but comprehensive expression
"the just shall live by faith" (Gal 3:11). It became the trumpet call of
the early church whereby literally millions were encouraged to forsake
ritualistic Observances for mystical union with Christ. Through the
centuries it found periodic re-emphasis until the days of Martin Luther,
when it became the watch-word of Protestantism. EurOpean and
Merican culture would have been vastly different but for these words.
Consider also the myriads of messages, Spoken and written, which
have endeavoured to plumb some slight passage from the epistles.

The themes of 1 Corinthians l3 and 15 are echoed daily around the world,

while a multitude of other passages are used to sanctify for many

419

believers almost every aspect and event of life. Contributing in large
measure to the influence of such Pauline concepts is their concise

but profound verbal expression.

Because Paul had the rare gift of being able to condense much
thought into a single sentence his epistles have proved a gold-mine of
preaching texts. Typical of such sentences are the following:

. . . the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. 2 Cor 3:6

For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we
preach Christ crucified, a sturnbling-block to Jews and folly
to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks,
Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 1 Cor 1:22-24 RSV

Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for whatever a
man sows, that he will also reap. Gal 6:7 RSV

Concise, but comprehensive, passages could be multiplied by
way of example. The best-known is the following:

Love is patient and kind; love is not jealous or boastful; it is
not arrogant or rude. Love does not insist on its own way;
it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrong,
but rejoices in the right. Love bears all things, hopes all

things, endures all things. Love never ends. . . . 1 Cor
13:4-8 RSV

Another passage, almost as well known, is Galatians 5:22-24

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kind-
ness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against
such there is no law. And those who belong to Christ Jesus
have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. RSV

3. Intensity of Expression

 

One needs no rhetorical training to mark this characteristic of
Paul's writing. Ardour and power stamp each of his messages.

He was filled with the conviction of a message of which he was
the vehicle; and thenceforth he Spoke under a compelling power
as great as that felt by the prophetS--a compelling power to
which he surrendered himself willingly and to the uttermost.
. . . this conviction of the worth of his message is the first

" l
c - _ . 1.4.:an \{ubv‘

S ‘3 {d 3151 3.6!”:-
In: [cactus-1‘! . 5

 

  
    
  
    
   
   
     

,
m t- wt. “Ruth _
A
at UL“ 'M '. [Pidu‘
5 '- 1. n 'im ‘w

I'-
{~ I
v .. Lu. :fllu'.

1

. . ir'
‘..).3.['.9'J£ 3 ,1
. -I.. . t 35936 '
;. #:1052110 ‘

a t:'. '.
. ”..
7 i

'4‘

k

L .4 BL" jimi‘.‘

. .r‘ ’I: Sin

midi-:o'lc'ga
l' wrath my-»
‘ 1 r. iuobrAf

”.13 IaJi'flrb ,
‘ “521:3 hr‘IS "

2 .

420

secret of his convincing oratory, and it carries with it as a
corollary a sense of responsibility and an intense earnestness.
St. Paul's mission is to convince. 1

Let us notice some examples.

1 Cor 9:16 RSV

For if I preach the gospel, that gives me no ground for
boasting. For necessity is laid upon me. Woe to me if I do
not preach the gospel'.

vs 19, 22, 2.3

For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a
slave to all, that I might win the more. . . . I have become all
things to all men, that I might by all means save some. *I do it
all for the sake of the gospel. . . .

vs 26, 27

. . . I do not run aimlessly, I do not box as one beating
the air; but I pommel my body and subdue it, lest after preach-
ing to others I myself Should be disqualified.

Galatians 1: 6- l 2

I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called
you in the grace of Christ and turning to a different gospel--not
that there is another gospel, but there are some who trouble

you and want to pervert the gOSpel of Christ. But even if we, or
an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gosPel contrary to
that which we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have
said before, so now I say again, If any one is preaching to you a
gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed.

Am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? Or am I
trying to please men? If I were still pleasing men, I should not
be a servant of Christ.

For I would have you know, brethren, that the g03pel which
was preached by me is not man's gospel. For I did not receive
it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through a revelation
of Jesus Christ.

Glatians 3‘: 1-4 Rsv‘

O foolish Galatians'. Who has bewitched you, before whose
eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified? Let me

 

1Kathleen E. Innes, The Bible as Literature (London: J. Cape,
1930), pp. 223—224.

 

 

 

421

ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of
the law, or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish? Having
begun with the Spirit, are you now ending with the flesh? Did
you experience so many things in vain?--if it really is in vain.

4:11-19
I am afraid I have labored over you in vain.

Brethren, I beseech you, become as I am, for I also have
become as you are. You did me no wrong; you know it was
because of a bodily ailment that I preached the gospel to you at
first; and though my condition was a trial to you, you did not
scorn or deSpise me, but received me as an angel of God, as
Christ Jesus. What has become of the Satisfaction you felt?
For I bear you witness that, if possible, you would have plucked
out your eyes and given them to me. Have I then become your
enemy by telling you the truth? They make much of you, but
for no good purpose; they want to shut you out, that you may
make much of them. For a good purpose it is always good to be
made much of, and not only when I am present with you. My
little children, with whom I am again in travail until Christ be
formed in you'.

6:14, 15

But far be it from me to glory except in the cross of our Lord
Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and
I to the world. For neither circumcision counts for anything,
nor uncircumcision, but a new creation.

Philippians 1:20-26

. . . as it is my eager expectation and hOpe that I shall not be

at all ashamed, but that with full courage now as always Christ
will be honored in my body, whether by life or by death. For to
me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. If it is to be life in the
flesh, that means fruitful labor for me. Yet which I shall choose
I cannot tell. I am hard pressed between the two. My desire is
to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better. But to remain
in the flesh is more necessary on your account. Convinced of
this, I know that I Shall remain and continue with you all, for your
progress and joy in the faith, so that in me you may have ample
cause to glory in Christ Jesus, because of my coming to you again.

422

4. Eloquent Climaxes Achieved Through the Grand Style

Two of the best examples of this characteristic are found in
Chapters 13 and 15 of 1 Corinthians. The hymn to love occurs after
Paul has gently rebuked vain and quarrelling schismatics in the church.
The second instance is the climax to Paul's argument regarding the

certainty of the resurrection of the body.

1 Cor 15:51-55 RSV

Lo'. I tell you a mystery. We shall not all Sleep, but
we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an
eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and
the dead will be raised imperishable, and we Shall be changed.
For this perishable nature must put on the imperishable, and
this mortal nature must put on immortality. When the perish-
able puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortal-
ity, then shall come to pass the saying that is written:

"Death is swallowed up in victory. "

"0 death, where is thy victory?”

"O death, where is thy sting?‘l

Yet another instance is the description of the Christian ministry
which appears as the culmination of Paul's arguInent regarding the
nature and privileges of the leaders in the early church.

2 Cor 6:3-10 RSV

We put no obstacle in any one's way, so that no fault may be
found with our ministry, but as servants of God we commend
ourselves in every way; through great endurance, in afflictions,
hardships, calamities, beatings, imprisonments, tumults,
labors, watching, hunger, by purity, knowledge, forbearance,
kindness, the Holy Spirit, genuine love, truthful Speech, and
the power of God; with the weapons of righteousness for the
right hand and for the left; in honor and dishonor, in ill repute
and good repute. We are treated as impostorS, and yet true;
as unknown, and yet well known; as dying, and behold we live;
as punished, and yet not killed; as sorrowful, yet always
rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing,
and yet possessing everything.

Paul's biographical résumés in 2 Cor 11:22-28 and Philippians

3:4-11 are conSpicuous among the many other eloquent climaxes which

c ould be cited.

 

l

1'1 '(139 1 .

... L‘lji‘é

v r. Jada .7

E:

f,

 

 

423

5. Occasional Ellipses, Digressions, and Obscurities

Gal 2:3, 4 is an instance of all three characteristics named
above. Paul has been discussing his career subsequent to conversion;
and upon reference to his journey to Jerusalem, he digresses by
referring to a particular experience there which concerned Titus his

associate.

But even Titus, who was with me, was not compelled to be
circumcised, though he was a Greek. But because of false

brethren secretly brought in, who slipped in to spy out our
freedom which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring

us into bondage--. . . RSV

The dash in the Revised Standard Version is inserted because
the sentence begun in verse four does not seem to be completed. Paul
apparently rushes on with other matters as memories come tumbling
in upon him. Because of this, it is difficult to be certain of _his exact
meaning in this passage, and the RSV and the KJV present alternative

views .

Other instances of digression have been pointed out in the analyses
of the development of thought.

Concerning the obscurities of Paul it Should be remembered
that often what is considered to be such may be only the result of the
archaic wording of the KJV, or the gap in our understanding of the
- ancient milieu caused by the intervention of nineteen centuries. In other

cases Paul is to blame when his teeming brain outdistanced the pen of

hi S amanuensi s .

6. Courtesy, Intimacy, Affection, and Authority

While the best example of Paul's use of emphatic, directive
expressions, implicative of authority is to be found in the first and
last chapters of Galatians, Philemon is outstanding for _its reveIation

of the Apostle's courtesy, intimacy, and affection. We would include

 

    
 
  
   
   
   
  
  
 
   
 

';_- 1:..vo,
. , , . niwrrrm‘l .
. - 2 Ic'uIJ- »
1‘
41.99
.\ - (I "J”i."

, - c ; 1";1111: $31"

. v
a -H

'4an 1..
A 4

1| ‘
Va":

1 . Q .flim' _' '

11:11 R1 :-

.; ,. ;' 1 mar, 16;
‘ r

' v c'.' 'r‘in'm. u;-

. - v
- c . ,' ~ 2 7:1 1mm 4 ,7
' c ,1 , c ‘3 l" 3:111:92

* 1; c c ' c .. ‘ 4.. xii-III} 11931. .-‘
" . ' ‘ ‘ . c ., c _ .I (d 81
U " ‘ V ‘ a.

.2138” -4

, . . "hr-.1
\ / I’vd 5) " ‘
c a , c c

J . ‘I '
....s. .. .7 - , . » , _, ,- iziieicrrwd'
' _.1 .I./‘1" , '-. .. i. 1.. ~ ~ . ' ,» Hi
.‘o 7.
ebultni Mum.- S ./ .--.r.i$'t-'_'-I v .7 ’f a . - . 1":~"iJ'«-‘J"7’ 9'19
{3. I
’ vi

_ ”III;
.. C

424

the attribute of tact also under courtesy. The two following quotations
are pertinent not only because they delineate Paul's manifestation of
these characteristics, but because they afford a comprehensive view

of the style of the only personal letter we have from the Apostle.

 

(The other epistles were addressed to large churches, but while this
epistle was read to the company of believers that met in Philemon's
house its message was primarily for the slave-owner himself.)

The aim of the letter is pursued with so much Christian love
and wisdom, with so great psychological tact, and, without
sacrifice of the apostolic authority, in a manner so thoughtfully
condescending, adroit, delicate, and irresistible that the brief
letter--which is in the finest sense "seasoned with salt" as a
most precious and characteristic revelation of the great
apostle--belongs, even as regards its Attic refinement and
gracefulness, to the epistolatory masterpieces of antiquity. l

The Epistle to Philemon has one peculiar feature--its
aesthetical character it may be termed--which distinguishes it
from all other epistles, and demands a Special notice at our
hands. It has been admired deservedly as a model of delicacy
and skill in the department of composition to which it' belongs.
The writer had peculiar difficulties to overcome. He was the
common friend of the parties at variance. He must conciliate
a man who supposed that he had good reason to be offended.

He must commend: the offender, and yet neither deny nor aggra-
vate the imputed fault. He must assert the new ideas of Christian
equality in the face of a system which hardly recognized the
humanity of the enslaved. He could have placed the question on
the ground of his own personal rights, and yet must waive them

in order to secure an act of Spontaneous kindness. His success
must be a triumph of love, and nothing be demanded for the sake
of the justice which could have claimed everything. He limits

his request to a forgiveness of the alleged wrong, and a restora-
tion to favor and the enjoyment of future sympathy and affection,
and yet would so guard his words as to leave scope for all the
generosity which benevolence might prompt toward one whose
condition admitted of so much alleviation. These are contrarieties
not easy to harmonize; but Paul, it is confessed, has Shown a

 

 

lMeyer, cited by George Barlow (ed.) Preacher's Homiletic
Commentary (London: Funk and Wagnalls Co. , n.d.), pp. 105-106.

 

 

 

.Â¥P_'.~!("I.
_. . f ._
v

' c
i
. .
~ v
I"‘
l ‘ 5
_ .
c ‘ d
v c. .
I
,c
c d . s. ..
...
._ c Q—
, ,
4 ~—. 1 K “r
‘ l
I .‘
I. ‘1 \J
1 v ,_ ,
l I _, l. . ‘ ..Jl

:* .Jliil“““‘

- a- ‘di Hg) 3...

113103.13.
:ztrafinotfi, -

   
   
  
  
  
  
 

.Iw: lb.
,' ‘, al.1913-
- L'ZJ' It!
O

;‘ . sit a I.) :2

.'
§
I. ‘-
n
C
r
. c.»
,4,
~
- .10":
I Iii-v
a s5 '
I
' .
,
g... ,1.‘

425

degree of self denial and a tact in dealing with them, which in
being equal to the occasion could hardly be greater. 1

Also typical of the Apostle's intimacy and affection are such
passages from the other letters as Phil 3:1,; 4:1; 2 Thess 1:7; 1 Thess
2:5-8; and 2 Cor 6:11. His endearing appellativesinclude "Brethren"

(1 Cor 1:10; 14:20, 26; 2 Cor 13:11; Gal 3:15; 6:18 etc.), "my beloved"

Phil 2:12; "Epaphroditus, my brother, and companion in labour, and
fellowsoldier" Phil 2:25. Other appeals to the feelings of his audience

are found in the sympathetic expressions of 2 Cor 2:4; 1:3-6; 1:7; 2:3; 5:1-4
7:2, 3; Phil 2:28; 2 Thess 2:16. ReSpectively, these seek the reSponses

of affection, comfort, hopefulness, joyfulness, expectancy, cordiality,

joy, hopefulness, and comfort. Thus Paul's selection of words with
emotional impact greatly adds to the quality and strength of his pathetic

proof.

7. Frequent Dialectical Approach

 

Chapters two to four of Galatians; 1 Corinthians nine, fourteen,
and fifteen, and 2 Corinthians eight and nine afford representative
instances of this feature of Paul's style. Affirmed John Locke:

I think that there is not anywhere to be found a more pertinent,
close arguer who has his eye always on the mark he drives at.
. . . I do not say that he is everywhere clear in his expression
to us now, but I do say that he is everywhere a coherent,
pertinent writer. 2

8. Liberal Use of Tropes and Figures

 

The next few pages illustrate with some scores of examples the

bountiful use of imagery found in these discourses. One striking lack,

 

1H. B. Hackett, (ed.), Dr. William Smith's Dictionary of the
Bible (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Co., 1881), p. 2485.

 

 

7‘Cited by Francis Peabody, The Apostle Paul and the Modern
world, pp. 75-760

 

L‘

‘.t ‘-

..,

v r

W“. W‘
*1- . lug-r.

. .

‘rr'L
‘4 ’3‘

"na-

‘-4

 

107‘

 
 

 

o

 
 
    

v"FfF

  

oiy‘

  

 

   
    
    
   
  

c ; d
‘\
1 ~ \1 ~"J
v s l“
t
V
s . Ll
. c ,
- ”.- ,L‘ _' 4 ,no
It
. -.
,zlxmjvjb
' l
y .‘I‘,._i wit-

. 6.-
Ii‘

ma . 17 1‘

;;- c.11-

3 iniqu-
v ‘1

,v . . " 2:1: i
l h;

c ' fir »m:; '10 ...-

- LUIZ 11.11,, 21!!

. . , vclrzfin 9'-

. . , JILibe‘
~' 'tur‘i ,ihfl.’

.' SL‘Z'." 11:5- If:

I c' inasU.

' 113110,! -

_ _ .. _..: ‘
,’_ . i) ,239flo3K-‘f

426

however, in the Apostle's otherwise abundant repertoire of trapes
and figures is the paucity of allusions to nature. ". . . the reference
to nature in St. Paul's writings are almost entirely to nature in

connection with human labor; not to its beauty . . . but to its useful

and beneficient processes under the work of cultivation. "1

Examples of Paul's allusions to nature as regards its productive
operations are found in 1 Corinthians 15:35-38; 15:42-44; 15:20, 23;
9:7-10; Galatians 6:7, 8; 2 Cor 9:6-9; 9:10, ll;A. reason for this anomaly
has been suggested.

. . . his soul was so entirely absorbed in the mighty moral and
‘ spiritual truths which it was his great mission to proclaim,
that not by one verse, scarcely even by a single exPression,
in all his letters, does he indicate the faintest gleam of delight
or wonder in the glories of Nature. . . . There are souls in
which the burning heat of some transforming purpose calcines
every other thought, every other desire, every other admiration;
and St Paul's was one. His life was absorbingly, if not solely
and exclusively, the Spiritual life--the life‘which is utterly dead
to every other interest of the groaning and travailing creation,
the life hid with Christ in God. He sees the universe of God
only as it is reflected in the heart and life of man.2

M etaphor

 

The Apostle has four favorite metaphors each of which may have
originated from his early experiences in Tarsus, the city of his birth.
These metaphors are related to Roman soldiery, classical architecture,
agriculture, and the Greek games. Reference has been made to the
allusions to agriculture, but the three other major metaphors are to

be found in the following texts.

 

1John S. Howson, The Metaphors of St. Paul and Companions of
St. Paul, (American Tract Society, 1871), p. 48.

 

 

2Farrar, St. Paul, p. 11.

 

     
        

   

   

  
   
   
 
   
   
      
   
 
  
   
  

. c - ; 8'11.“ .. t“: at”
, , ._ , _ l ,t» ix: ‘ v r LIL? (11‘
, , c c :f .' .30 a“ .'
1‘ r
J‘ . .
-’, - - x 1.7131"!
.7 ._ c .. v I
.! w >
. I
. '~ 3 I!”
‘ " ‘1"! r'icuc
7. ,‘ _i
12 , _ ‘ ,,tr:'g:‘u.180"
P . .
’ . Llrujgfllll‘a .
3 . . .
‘ 5 x. V 7 LL“ ' . 1,]
, ' 1111313
' - . c - c ‘gd 3' n “'3.
I , V.SL.’ “LI: “.5 II
c . :Kituw' ,
. V (1:/«1... (ltih‘,
IL
' ‘ - l‘ 1 w “..,
k . c , .- JISI ( t H I
- ' .. '(IJ‘r‘I 38 I g' "
b
-<- f ;. ,:1Lv ’_’ N'JXQ "V-
., . I
r - 1;.iu “(19W 1'
v . 5.1»; 01“:
c c - '. Ll. .'. “1.1,, 1;:
. - ' - :Habqlfi
a - c c _ :zisi maid »
a .11 czr. .12!qu :.~
' ‘5'
‘ Ir ‘ 3,
c a c . c .. en's H15 , .-.
c _- . c ‘;‘.J}7U!l:‘i18§. ' .
. s z - '.‘.l(..[ eta",
. c- :r (aural-l ‘Q-‘
. <( ,"r; ' :1 ..._ 17.2911 it"),
. . ,1!!!sz .33 .,

 

 

427

Architecture: Gal 2:18; 1 Cor 8:1,10; 2 Cor 12:19; 6:16;
1 Cor 6:19; 10:23; 14:3-5,12,17; 3:9; 2 Cor 5:1; Gal 2:9.
Military: 1 Thess 5:5-8; 2 Cor 2:14-16; 10:3-6; 7:5; 1 Cor

 

 

15:23, 52; 14:8.
Greek Games: 2 Thess 3:1; Gal 2:2; 5:7; Phil 2:16; 3:12-14;
1 Thess 2:2; 1 Cor 9:24-27.

 

M etonymy

 

Metonyrny is employed in 1 Cor 10:21, and Gal 2:7.

Personification

 

Personification is found in 1 Cor 15:55, Gal 3:8, 22 and in at
least one other Scripture. The first-mentioned is the most well-

known. "0 death where is thy victory? 0 death, where is thy sting?"

Simile
There are eight sirniles in 1 Thessalonians, four in 2 Thessalonians,
twenty-six in 1 Corinthians, twenty-three in 2 Corinthians, eight in

Galatians, five in Philippians, and three in Philemon.

Paradox and Oxymoron

 

Paul has a definite penchant for paradoxes. That he delights in
them is apparent from 2 Cor 12:10; 1 Cor 3:9; 8:10; 2 Cor 4:8-10;
6:9, 8:2; 1 Thess 4:11; 1:6. A typical instance is: "When I am weak,

then am I strong. " 2 Cor 12:10.

Euphemism

See 1 Cor 5:1, 2; 2 Cor 7:11; 1 Thess 4:6.

 

Irony

 

2 Cor 11:7 ”Did I commit a sin in abasing myself so that you might

be exalted, because I preached God's gOSpel without cost to you? RSV

311”." --
_.: ..w' ( 4.2,“; - '; " "
_.-

 

428

2 Cor 12:13 For in what were you less favored than the rest
of the churches, except that I myself did not burden you? Forgive
me this wrong'. RSV

Hyperbole

 

There is little hyperbole in the Paulines, but the figure is found
in 2 Cor 2:14; Rom 16:19; 1 Thess 1:8.

Paronomasia

 

This figure in the form where it is dependent upon a play of words
of similar sound or origin is Paul's most used rhetorical figure. Only
the Greek original reveals its prevalence, and therefore some examples
from the Koiné are given.

2 Cor 3:2 ginoskomene kai anaginoskomene

 

Phil 3:2, 3 katatome . . . peritome

 

 

1 Cor 11:29-31 diakrisis . . . krima . . . katakrima

 

 

 

1 Cor 7:31 chomenoi . . . katachromenoi

 

 

2 Cor 6:10 echontes . . . katechontes

 

 

2 Cor 4:8 aporournenoi . . . exaporoumenoi

 

 

Paronomasia of another class consiSts of plays on names. For
example,

Philemon 11, Onesimon . . . achreston

 

 

Philemon 20 Nai, eyo sou onaimen

 

 

In the first of these instances, Paul plays upon the meaning of
the slave's name of Onesimus. The word means "profitable, " and
Paul links with the [name a synonym for this characteristic. In the
second instance, Paul uses again the former of these words in its

usual form when not employed as a prOper noun. 1

 

lSee Farrar, St. Paul, pp. 693-696 for a more complete list of
figures.

 

429

COpious Vocabulary and Richness of Expression

 

It has been said that the variety of adjectives he has at
his command is the test of a man's culture. St. Paul would
come well out of this test, and his adjectives are not mere
repetition. Each adds some shade of meaning that is necessary:
'The King is eternal, immortal, invisible.’ The servant of
the Lord should be 'gentle, apt to teach, patient. ' Nouns and
phrases used in a qualifying or descriptive sense are added one
to another in the same way. 1

But St. Paul is no waster of words. Not one of all these nouns
and adjectives could be removed without doing injury to the
meaning. Where the meaning requires it he can, as has been
already illustrated, write with dignified simplicity, and he does
so particularly when he is uttering profound truths with a practi-
cal application to life. His style is reSponsive to the purposefor
which the particular passage is designed. To persuade, he
makes use of a wide variety of illustrations and comparisons,
and there is an avoidance of monotony. Sometimes there are
flowing and sonorous passages; at other times simple and
dignified statement. St. Paul is master of his instrument.2

Another writer makes the following claim:

Certainly no more expert and Splendid dialectical energy than
that of Paul is known to have wrought in even the abundant and
delicate Greek tongue.3

10. An Overall Approach Towards Language Which
Was in Strong Contrast to that Shown by Contemporary
Stylists of the Second SOphistic

 

 

 

It is noteworthy that Paul, with regard to style, was not a child
of his age. In the chapter on the Second Sophistic the rhetorical
characteristics of Paul's day were delineated. It was an age that cared J
for form rather than substance, that delighted in exhibition and

virtuosity. The significant ideas eXpressed in oratory were few, but

 

lInnes, p. 236.
zlbid” p. 238.

 

3Storrs, Divine Origin of Christianity, p. 225, cited by Kuist,
pp. 105-106. ~

 

   
 
   
  
    
  
   
   
 
  
 
   

.
‘.' .:JI‘; 1;.3: 3,;(13! _'

‘J
93.;‘11131‘ rurme

...; 21.: _- L1H» Haw

T;
.
. ....“ m '. '..‘5.'Ud'bl_

. - ; .iinin -‘ ‘
, I .zivbna-
_ ~r ' J_.I1'i:1£q.n
.4... :7 ..‘Jtviqus
' 1:2..1 aria do -.5,

.. . "'c‘ufia ‘_
..10'15111 b- '

1!: 1(1le

_, 121.. 10:11 '- -. J

c ; it '-‘7‘(1R.1 1..
:1 inf/'51 it). .. ‘5

“.- " ‘. ‘Lu'f'5» 5359'
.'

‘1 ' x". 11.61.} _-"

' ;" :mrxfi ’__ .

r:

:3.;:-., "Hiya-n51!) I "

|

,1 .:'.M 525'." $113 a
n:'_f.r:r‘.’i lo 86 «:3 -
$524.02; {.5113 '10 7

4- ’3:

 

430

frills and techniques were multitudinous. Rhetoric "had degenerated
into 'inflated, extravagant word-Spinning, ' completely removed from
the world of, reality. "1
Those who find fault with the oratory of Paul in our own genera-
tion do so on the grounds thatattimes he went to the opposite extreme
from that of typical Speakers in the Second SoPhistic. He was vitally
concerned with matter rather than manner; and although capable of
impressive eloquence, the Apostle sometimes sacrificed this for what
he considered to be a more important end. Augustine points out, for
example, how the Apostle's rhythm of phrasing could have been im-
proved with a little care.2 He also makes a remark concerning Paul's
style which is reminiscent of Campbell's concept that "the means by
which the orator shall accomplish his purpose must differ according to

the nature of the effect desired. "3 Says Augustine:

A certain kind of eloquence is more fitting for youth, and
another is more becoming for old age; so much so that we
should not call it eloquence if it is not apprOpriate for the
person of the Speaker. There is a kind of eloquence, then,
which is becoming for men eminently worthy of the highest
authority and manifestly inspired by God. Biblical writers
have Spoken with this kind of eloquence; no other kind be-
comes them, nor is that kind suitable for other writers.

It is apprOpriate for them, and the more humble it seems
to be, the higher it rises above others, not because of its
conceit, but because of its solidity.4

This Church Father, who prior to his conversion had been a
professional teacher of rhetoric, apparently believed that because the

purpose of writers of Scripture such as Paul was to work reformation

 

lThonssen and Baird, p. 99.
zAugustine, p. 209.
3Thonssen and Baird, p. 135
4Augustine, pp. 175-176.

 

 

.; LL :LI'pjha" ,-

~- ‘...owflloa

   
  
   
  
 
  
  
    
  
   
  
  
   

.1.- .1' . ' :33 '. ~
I 1 ,
.1121 ms: in

f 111‘” a? .

I LL11.) my.

. .. §."‘({3io..
.;§ . . riJiw I..- .'

~~ .- «mu. Lo ov_

- w 'J uuofi
{.4 {5
l‘ V " ~i’ "("1 II:
.. ‘ -_ xix}. 1; [131.1
. . ' 1

~ - 4—"- "l ‘1') j
.1
2-1 3mm - .

- - 1 “113330! ‘I
. -.~. , a." :.i am
.. x.” .. 'Jr [1 b. .
_ 1:213 :LLW;‘_,.
: uf 3i ' ‘5
.1: 731-1..
1 52:113.“

. .¢

a J ((Iqq

L -.rl-._':.r! .
— m. ‘I 31'

.
'1
'N

v

431

of life rather than impress by virtuosity, therefore some apparent
shortcomings in style Should be expected. Examples are to be found
in such passages as 1 Corinthians 11, Galatians 2 etc. , where the
obvious purpose is to clarify Christian duty rather than to provide
verbal delights. Nevertheless, even in these passages there is
evidence of stylistic excellency perceived as such when we recall that
ornateness is but a minor quality of style, ever to be held subsidiary

to clearness and correctness.

With these preceding characteristics of Paul's style in mind, we
would consider the prevailing concept and criteria of style which is
offered in summary by two representative Speech critics.

. . . style is neither a mysterious embellishment added to a
speech nor a literary veneer superimposed upon it. Indeed,

it represents the way in which a language pattern is used, under
a given set of conditions, (1) to make ideas acceptable and (2)

to get the reSponse sought by the Speaker. Style becomes the
instrumentality through which ideas are made meaningful; it
clothes the reason and emotion of the Speaker in such words as
will have intelligibility value for the hearers. . . . The essential
components of a Speaker's style are aSpects of the communicative
act. An effective style--that is, one capable of preparing and
opening the minds of the listeners for a particular subject--
depends upon a Speaker's having (1) an idea worth presenting,

(2) an unmistakably clear conception of the idea, (3) a desire to
communicate it, (4) a willingness to adapt it to a particular set
of circumstances, and (5) a mastery of language adequate to
express the idea in words.1

This study suggests that nine of the ten characteristics of Paul's
style which have been mentioned comply with the criteria here laid
down. Paul's ellipses, digressions, and obscurities remain a blemish,
deSpite the fact that we can easily account for them, (see page 423).

It should be stressed again that much of the modern difficulty in

 

1Thonssen and Baird, p. 430.

 

   
     
   
  
  
       
    
  

..1:(U‘;2.7

‘fi

- "~ -“ "' “3 ~ 1‘1 Hui...
. , w 5 . fibfgfi”
anrq' ,
. 23:15} 6."

)l
v
I
r
r

. --..I -. ~ .m .I..” -3"*¥‘ Lip-Slum...“

5 n - _ - . " """t12:10 .'-
. \
‘5‘ 44118.17.
. 5 55 b
0
-'n ".3L113 I13 . “u?
_ .. ..1 4',ij I.
l :7
- " .1. :‘UL: ni‘ .I.:
‘ ‘ n \ l ‘
~ »~ . .‘ cc. . .
5 I 5 .. ‘ \"
‘ _. ... .. '1‘ 1.9.1:,

. . . ed: M'
’ runonmf.’

L. “3' -113 cod 55"
. A. .. . .; 93.19/51! '
. =13:.6r20q::._. I ‘5'

. ”..-... -11.;
I ) . -, ..nu 1‘»va 3., '.

o

a

I
A
":3
(A
3.:
. "‘.
h.
H
5'

 

432

comprehending some passages of Paul is due more to our separation
in time from his day, and the archaic rendering of the Bible version

most employed (KJV), rather than to his deficiencies as a stylist.

CHAPTER VII

PAULINE ETHOS COMPARED WITH THE ETHOS OF
LATE AMERICAN PREACHING THEORY

As noted in the Introduction, one of the objectives of the present

study is to compare Pauline ethos with the ethos described in recent

 

 

American preaching theory. We now propose to do this.

For the purposes of his dissertation ”Concept of Ethos in Late
American Preaching, " John J. Rudin II studied over two hundred books
setting forth the recommendations of recent American homileticians.1

He was, as has been suggested, particularly interested in the role

ascribed to ethos although this term itself was rarely used by the

 

writers on preaching.2

Not only did Rudin find that the concept of e_zt_l:_1_qs in preaching
theory had strong contrasts to, as well as some similarities with, the
classical rhetorical concept, but it became apparent that these
divergencies originated in the distinctive premises of preaching,
premises which set this branch of rhetoric in a separate category
from secular oratory. Typical references given by Rudin are the

following.

 

lThese volumes were written by Protestants between the years
1870 and 1950.

ZRudin declares that the ”definition by Aristotle is broadened
and paraphrased for purposes of investigation to 'the effect upon the
listener of the Speaker's person, whether before or during the speech-
situation'" "Concept of Ethos in Late American Preaching" (unpub-
lished Ph. D. dissertation, Department of Speech, North-Western
University), p. 10. See Appendix for Rudin's summary of his conclu-
Sions.

433

  
 

    

5 _. .o’¥.v
—... - 3"

  

. ‘ L 1‘
, . ~|
:1 .- a J I {“1“}!er "_
2 .y - J . irlinfib'lq -
. ‘9‘
- ' _ 1.. , mm, 833':
.r. ,1 14;-.5919
(1"
c l _ ._ - . 5'- 51.73
. - .. . v-«Tx-zdm '5
.g ( h\ v - us. i l a .'
J: c; ‘ " €37. H1130 OGL-
T . t
a v ,r.‘ . .
. >11. J:.01C[ v '3’:
- ;. in; i; ; u )2: visa
|-
- c . ;‘ r. i 1: Maine,
.:'. _J . 3rd ,1" e : I Indian”.
.. Q 1. .1 a 3 .3. -J“- 1(11‘10 9"“: .
r. _
.'. .c 1.:1 aid; flea dal--"--
L chem. I. - Y vv';3£‘10.3
- Yu -3; .3" L 51m!
o I ‘
- _ £3; " 5.11.33'211'3 851.81”-
/;g.1;a:' i- tsmwvunq 1103C .. :-l
-cr..s.’ , « mu a'nnlsoqa- "
z; ..1'-: :5. '—:F‘[:3'55. 10 3qe .41
' ' 3' c Sr 5 ,1 «1353-1583
H '17'1‘ ertr,".se-°. .O_'
f '
.‘f'
f! r
.‘u:
‘l

‘191..‘

' ’1' bank '
I

    
    
 
 
   
   
  
   
   

434

The preacher is a public speaker like the lecturer and the
orator. Like them he must regard the laws of rhetoric and
elocution. Like them he must study the workings of the
mind and the Special conditions of the associate mind of the
crowd. . . . 1

Rudin now draws attention to the following qualification made
by the writer of this statement.

A man must Speak the message, a man who knows and feels

its power, a man throbbing with its Spirit and import. And

here preaching, though using all the natural powers and arts

of Speech, is lifted distinctly above rhetoric and elocution,

into a higher plane of Spiritual influence. It is the power of
personal testimony, the Christ speaking through his messengers.
”Ye are my witnesses. ..z

Preaching is quite different than oratory. The pulpit is
another place than the platform. . . . The Christian preacher
is the successor, not of the Greek orator, but of the Hebrew
pr0phet. The orator comes but with an inspiration, the prophet
comes with a revelation. Insofar as the preacher and the
prophet had an analogue in Greece, it was the dramatist, with
his urgent sense of life's guilty tragedy, its inevitable ethic,
its unseen moral powers, and their atoning and purifying note.

Moreover, where you have the passion for oratory, you
are not unlikely to have an impaired style and standard of
preaching. For if your object is to secure your audience,
rather than your gosPel, preaching is sure to suffer. . . . It is
one thing to have to arouse or persuade people to do something,
put themselves into something; it is another to have to induce
them to trust somebody and renounce themselves for him. The
one is the political region of work, the other is the religious
region of faith. . . . The orator stirs men to rally, the preacher
invites them to be redeemed. . . . The orator, at most, may
urge men to love their brother, the preacher beseeches them
first to be reconciled to their Father. With preaching Christian-
ity stands or falls because it is the declaration of a gospel. Nay
more-~far more--it is the gospel prolonging and declaring itself.3

 

1Arthur F. Hoyt, The Work of Preaching, cited by Rudin, p. 24.
21bi<i., p. 16.

3P. T. Forsyth, Positive Preaching and the Modern Mind (London:
Hodder and Stoughton, 1907), pp. 3-5, cited by Rudin pp. 39—40.

 

 

    
     
    
        
  
 

- » ~ \' ' ‘ t" ad: c. -; .uo“
- _ c 1:. L. -. 0113155
I I I
. a L.-" '3 '_\r.'l
_ ,c ..c ~ . c' "(1‘ ‘
1 * 1"; "fig
r I L
w ‘ I
. - - c ‘. - , L. - .11 soon
- ‘ - v '- ‘-
. - - . - V . h -. c3 9:21.132;
. V - .1 YY‘LI'Ifi' d
D
\ L V ' V_ , f‘bJ“ _ ‘
c 1 -/ .u 1‘. «um -
. . c- _ _ , - Li. ., 2' with .
. 'g '
L , i, i» ...L
, c e , . ” , . - a ., L (1.11"
_ * .~ c - r . 41301
i , ‘ c ‘ ' I. e L. J!

- \ .pni:

1\ 7 ‘ \ L
. -1 - '. c . . ' r 1 1112111 -
, .- ;; - '. - cf .Lr'rfrzlgnflfl
. - . _ - ._ , - ... , v f: - _.‘SV’lt-a -'. ‘u
_ . _ c - , - ' c H; ;, ':.;:;u::10¢,- ,"
' .:, . ;'*..': - _ ;. . , .'n. 1. iil!~([.‘41b‘;"-f-
~ v L .\ ‘ i “ l -.f . . . midi/.1 10 , '5
\ .5: » . - L . . . . L L :. L :41; (3 ((1.511;
- - c- - - .c - . , 1.. .. 2 r. .L .1; a N11 0:! 113,:
-r 4;. - “T; .' . ;. y“ I- :i w. v. .'.:.I (mo: 9:! -

v

.. ‘3 cu. so 81.1.21 ‘10 e.
E" " f " ' =v‘3..;.;~v—S'rtr.'x

.— ...“. yo 5;; 7.; .~. .

V 1

 

A

mount-.1) ’mi" mew 5113 ,,..£ v. use-.7 eviji'm'; ,ddwg'ni
.0¥-—9£ .th {.3131}? yd .:‘sfii‘l , —E .(;'r~' ,(TNI .no"

L V1: * l.

 

435

In the closing chapter of Rudin's dissertation a summary is
made regarding the distinctive characteristics of preaching as viewed
by the preaching theorists.

Preaching receives ”its own peculiar character as distinct
from all others", in the Opinion of the writers, because it is
prophetic utterance, because the preacher is a called and
commissioned messenger of God, invested with authority,
who proclaims a Word not his own. "The preacher is a
channel, not a source. "

In the light of this basic premise, the foregoing
characteristics of the literature are seen to be aSpects of a
distinctive Godward orientation and a unique message-conscious-
ness which distinguish preaching from Aristotelian rhetoric. 1

Such unique premises naturally result in differences of method
which are recognized as such when aligned with classical rhetoric.
For example, preaching makes much of inartistic proofs whereas the
stress of Aristotle was upon the artistic. "The 'given' nature of the
G03pel, Bible, Word, and message favor inartistic proofs, already
existing, ready for use by the Speaker, revealed to him. This dis-

courages a method- emphasis. "7‘

Closely allied to, and probably reSpons-
ible for this difference is the fact that while secular rhetoric does not
deal with absolute or final truth, preaching claims to do that very thing.
Similarly, secular rhetoric makes no claim regarding "absolute
authority, and is limited to the realm of probabilities, "3 while preach-
ing asserts that its ”source and ground of authority is God, who supplies

the message, ”4 a message which by virtue of its origin expresses

absolutes with complete confidence.

 

lRudin, pp. 464-465.
zl_bi_d_:, p. 467.
311333;, p. 466.
4%, p. 467.

1 ‘ iU . .Ln.1c;".ui which.

   
   
  
 
  
   
   
  
  
  
  

1
_ I . .1 ' *L'l‘; ..
.- I L. J'
a r .. . ,. w‘ .L OIL
- a '. --f :1." Janipzrltvfi

-. . e a . .9113?!“
- - ~ 1 L «u my i .
e \ V- ._ . c 6 Limit“ {101
’ . c2; .3,(*'5'5'1‘ av- ‘1
a '5 '1‘ 14.1" ,bitl-I“
. '. " : . i Lx-JIJILE'LA‘l'
. - .-a“; .'T , w ,bklp.
.1; .e 11", a r; ...1 Yb“ .' 'I
_ ,. 5 . * z . e-« r diam a: -
“ “ -‘ ,4 L:~L’bflib 51'1"“
h
.- . .' s "‘11). 1 I‘ ..JUlOva-w-w

d
" . o c .1: . :‘t. u: Elna :- I"
': e .3 .1 Lnir‘ 11 ‘1 big”:
,0 .I 5 Thu 37;" 7:11 31:15. "' »
" i. v. ‘ -.~ 5,; r :2 15!“ .6 “"131.

o,

_, ‘5 1‘

.‘_- L 12.: . . 5351(IIUOQIL?5
‘ ‘(WI

4?. f
; DII.

 

436

Almost as significant is the different emphasis upon audience-
adaptation. A comprehensive statement by Rudin synthesizes the
contrast between religious and secular oratory in this respect.

Both Aristotelian rhetoric and preaching reflect the
influence of the social setting. Aristotelian rhetoric, lacking
the ultimate authority of a Bible and a sense of divine com-
mission, and therefore viewing the audience as "judge", is
rhetoric of method, the primary goal of which is persuasion,
with adaptation of arguments the chief means of effectuating
logical, ethical, and pathetic proof. The Speaker's ultimate
authority rests in his ability to persuade the audience by
means of these modes of proof, and such a rhetoric must
emphasize as a major motif the adaptation of arguments to
the audience.

Christian preaching, on the other hand, is conditioned by its
religious premises, which are rooted in the Old Testament.
Viewing the preacher as a successor to the Hebrew pr0phet,
as a messenger with a divinely-given message, as a witness,
as a "servant of the Word", the writers emphasize the
Speaker's relation to his subject as primary, and his relation
to the audience becomes a secondary concern.

As a consequence, they view the Speaker's personal
qualities primarily in relation to God, and only secondarily in
relation to their effect upon the bearer. .

Likewise, this subject-and message—orientation leads the
writers to distrust adaptation to the preferences of the listener,
as a threat to the objective truth of the message and the faithful-
ness of the messenger, and they relegate the audience and
audience-adaptation to a role of minor importance.

Impelled also by their view of preaching as ministry, they
emphasize the preacher's role as a minister to human needs,
and thus they advocate analysis and adaptation in the interests
of effective ministry, rather than in the interests of the evincing
of ethos.

In this characteristic lack of interest in adaptation as a
means of evincing ethos, and in their emphasis upon ministry to
human needs, the writers on preaching differ basically from the
method- emphasis of Aristotle, in which adaptation to the audience
is a primary requisite for the evincing of ethos.

Aristotle developed a rhetoric of t0poi, of dianonia, and of
adaptation; in Christian preaching, adaptation is a minor canon.l

 

 

 

 

lRudin, pp. 392-393.

I“ If”. Jim! I .1;

v
, r \ .
.v
- ,‘
, ..
on _ '
. I.‘
:1,
1. LY
' L '5. 1.1;"-

.ncmsn in: r, <21 larvi3_r'.sv'1".c : is.“ he 1r 1 ml: 21".: 115’ 524‘

  
  
 
   
  
  
   
  
   
  
   
   
  

o - - ---; -..i. i .:'wz-i‘iiu; .:'.
; c -. a: c i; nition.
, o ' c ,_ rm Lift/1 not:

_ , ' W . Lila i» i; L {fikfl's
- . .13.. r; . . will it! of) ‘

, c . "I. ‘, .231 m N.
c ' t V -' -‘ ;.;..(.:.1 .r‘. .n ‘
. ...; in film
- r , . difficubd
.~. ‘~ , L it‘d!) JAIL 7

\
,- '. a
‘ XI
.. 'Ufl‘flfliv
~ a » ‘ in ‘
, a '
- , c . .
..\ . . iii-xx. 52":5
a y ._ "e ... z 151‘ 1m ..7.
, . I
i ,, ,, . . ‘ \c _ V - '1 . -' .1. (JAN .
1; , ' r c - x , 2 ‘ .'I'JQ Bo
. r - c ' -. ..- Sufi (v.1 no a: ,
.. , , . ’ ' ‘
- «_ _ —. ... .i ,_ ..1 L151 ‘.
- - . . , ‘4 H1}; (.3 31.;N
. I 2 ‘
a c - .J a a . c. ‘ Liz! ‘I’ 350: 1‘
o " '_ \-“.C ‘, ;‘:;':':fi“ $115 .‘-w
’ ' -. wii» J" 5145-933
Y. H c ' .:‘ I; '{L L 3J1? ‘ ”115’; u-
- “ ' ’ a .5 y 691-! all as
' 1 . x ' “(...
’ c - : I. ‘ . - - ,gsarvur‘
.3
x . ..,. I,
,. ~.. .~.. . . .I J. ...: 4 .5‘ (A 8
H 9:: a i; 1' ; . xiii; 'ni'vri‘ts ,
‘3, :.'.V. 1 V ';' ' ' 11:3; J sdh‘ .855
.‘ m ~ ~; 1, ' ,-' ; .’ZL’J" ..r 'ziasda.‘
. A ' 1': - '1. c . - '3 Lulélfjpb'l Ygtrrr

I

L ,ers': , _i'.";z:.::-. 3 irrlavo'r; 013035

 

 

 

 

3:93; it

 

437

It should be noticed that this statement does not declare that
audience-adaptation plays no part in the work of the preacher. It says,
rather, that this adaptation occupies a secondary rather than a
primary place, and also that analysis and adaptation have as their
purpose the benefiting of the audience in a Spiritual way rather than

the making manifest of the speaker's ethos.

 

The above quotation suggests the inevitable modification of the

Aristotelian concept of ethos made by preaching theorists. In essence,

 

while Aristotle required the evincing of virtue, competence, and good
will, homiletics demands the actual possession of these qualities.

The preacher's reflection of the attributes of ethos is not to be a calcu-

 

lated affair. Rather it is the unconscious revelation of the transformed
character of "a man in Christ" Speaking Heaven's message with author-

ity. Thus while for Aristotle, ethos is manifested through thought

 

revealed in argument, for the preacher it is the inevitable diSplay of
"truth through personality. "
The man who claims to be Heaven's messenger is not to view the

virtues as merely t0poi for arguments evincing persuasive ethos.

 

Instead he is to view such qualities as ones which he is obliged to
possess. They must never be simulated by him. Thus the preacher's

authority (which is a cognate of the classical ethos) is not to be viewed

 

as a cloak for his own inadequacies. The following statement suggests

in summary form the homiletic concept of ethos derived from recent

 

American preaching theory.

While a number of writers recognize the importance of
the Speaker-hearer relationship, the conceptions of "message"
and ”ambassadorship” lead them to view the role of the Speaker
as announcer of a communication from a higher authority, the
messenger thereby requiring and acquiring ”authority". This
"authority" is viewed as originating in the preacher's relation-
ship to God, Christ, the Bible, the church, and his ministerial
office. These are insufficient, but personal religious eXperience

   
  
    
   
 
   
     
     
 
    
   
     
 
 

\.
c _ . fit- 13 *3 L‘Iuv 5d b I‘:".'
- - _ , g umsaq‘ ‘1'.

L -. v «'E‘h '. vi inks" . .

N
~

L J l . : “.5 ,Und' '(
1 ' - c c , ‘ mafi'u. it-(KU
s ,‘
_ .. .v -i 4 .. . Lzli‘llm f-V'I
-~_ citrdau,‘
' . 'j. " :1 f .
,, 5 _ ., , t )1 fl '
J
- -- - Mg.» an;
- r 1 #33391 ,, ‘
' r . .2 I; X 3'10“ ‘

, . . Vi oflrfw
_ ,
r L . _ ‘ '.. ,3. r 117315 “A
.‘I.
.\‘ .l-‘Lbl {in ‘a’fi
L V - . - , -L . ‘ Z ‘rdw mm"
_D
, r ' L ' . a ‘. .. . -3 Warren!““
1’ .‘-

_ . - uivoia‘,
‘v’

L . ~ L L-; Jfllriway .'
v r -’
, - , 1 7 . - - . u a. 11;. , .*

. '1",
x ' ;- -- -- .LQ. / o .1» r ning if".
_ . ' l
c - . c r '; 'L .g. ’[1L1t31‘fl't 'l'

. :1 £113 grid ’14

c : L i-,_'._ L .L 1;; .'u'zss‘

_ .. L . . L -.-. ,, .1. ' :' pinned—10,
' V

c o “ c _ i t _ L r . _ "LT ix; :tha-m. .
c ,{L' .L‘ w. 1'. » i. j: '43:. i 111') F?“

. {Li L _'r“ ' , ‘__‘_,,.» t '_ “(45,391” ,- pf. '.
' r x
. . ~ . - . V . - ‘IpJ .
-‘...'L..i a 1 '. ii. _..“; L ...u: ~ orz £13.”. w '-
zmuwurx. an. ,x . ' 2.11:; c .. ,; .._‘ , ;e.r_. ,..aun.'.) » . ) ’
.

snack-15:12:: zucipile; ~.r.: ' = 11;!” LL! T ,L' a} 11.-hr .3. on; .o w".

 

438

augments his authority. Finally, his personal qualifications
of piety, competence, veracity and delivery further enhance
his authority. 1

Preaching thus becomes "both an art and an incarnation. "2

At this juncture it is our purpose to compare the practice of
Paul at the beginning of the era of Christian preaching with the modern
concepts of homiletics discussed above. IS there some correlation
between these, or have Paul's descendants evolved basic viewpoints
which stand in contrast to the matter and methods exemplified by the
Apostle? If the former is found to be the case, was Paul at least
partly reSponSible for the Significant emphases of homileticians of our
day?

We have already noticed in the analyses of the epistles that
ethical proof occupies a conSpicuouS place in Pauline oratory, and we
have also discovered that such proof is capable of evaluation according
to the classical criteria. Now we would inquire whether the Apostle's

ethos shares, in addition, the extra qualities suggested by recent

 

preaching theory, and whether basically it partakes of the same nature
as the suggested ideal in this regard. In view of these aims, the
following questions are appropriate as we reconsider the personal proof
contained in the Pauline discourses:
1. Does the claim of being an ambassador for God occupy a
prominent place in the ethical arguments of the Apostle?
2. Did Paul profess to be the bearer of a divine revelation?
3. Did he place more emphasis upon his personal authority than
upon his other characteristics?
4. Did the Apostle consider himself pre-eminently as a witness

for Christ rather than as an advocate?

 

 

lRudin, pp. 75-76.
21bid., p. 478.

I
I

. J'L‘L‘b

«we»:-

 

i . film AIM”. ..id 2'.»

, ..I
L. . .' zzufzmb

     
    
   
   
     
  

~ .. ,zthJS- ‘1') .,
.'yii'm C-

o

. L-‘ :1" Law" .. L)” W“;
W -.-. :7 3,: mini ful". ov'x
v .14.;1PD‘9’I“.
-' '. iii-.‘V'itmufla -
._ 1 L .‘ -,,. ,L‘BC'
. . .. .1 M3:
- .J '. .4. {AU 11

- .1 l; (.l‘thf‘

. $2 [1.
x. V" u' MIR/yr: bay - .
’ ' D

1...,3 ‘r' , LID/I LID
' Q

In. ; L fit :: HIK'F. infinita-

.t‘T-€V ':.
. .4 no
r"

439

5. Was extensive use made by Paul of inartistic proofs such
as the Old Testament Scriptures, and were these given more
weight than the artistic proofs of his own devising?

6. AS the indications of Paul's adaptation to his audiences are
reviewed, do we find evidence that such adaptation was
secondary to the major purpose of conveying an authoritative
and unchanging message? Or, on the other hand, do we find
that audience adaptation was a method for primarily mani-
festing personal proof?

7. Does the evidence point beyond the profession of virtue by

 

Paul to his actual possession of the primary ethical qualities?

 

8. Do the Pauline discourses comply with the modern homiletic
dictum that preaching should be ”both an art and an incarnation"?
We would answer the first four questions by representative
passages from each of the addresses under study. Each of the following
references has a readily perceived bearing upon at least one of these
questions which are considered as a group because of their natural

affinity .

1 Thessalonians

 

. . . just as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with
the gOSpel, so we Speak, not to please men, but to please God
who tests our hearts. For we never used either words of flattery,
as you know, or a cloak for greed, as God is witness; nor did we
seek glory from men, whether from you or from others, though
we might have made demands as apostles of Christ. 2:4-6 RSV

 

 

 

 

. . . for our gOSpel came to you not only in word, but also in
power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction. You know
what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake.

And you became imitators of us and of the Lord, for you received
the word in much affliction, with joy inSpired by the Holy

Spirit. . . . 1:5, 6 RSV

 

 

 

.LI‘ “’0?" 0";I?
H I": J.

L :1. 5. out :3 1“}ng ”..

   
   
   
    
  
   
  
  
    
  
  

‘LZ xJ‘JUJ _
I“! . Ti 1)!“
... . , , IIL. Iiakvn. .
A ' ~
Iii 51.25109“.
1'
'» I . '1 ”ID him”
L L . -i 3.12.141!“ '
.‘ LI' thBhti
’
L . I. La: 0900'“.- _
. If.
' ’ 'L,H l1: Ill-sq ‘
L" -. .LIII. Ldj' (KL:-
- t ‘ ‘
I-.L ."Irrdodn. .
.- - . L . r: ' LIIGW'I.

L 'L .4 {If no 010117 2'

~ L." L;
-L xL/u' ‘ I"..

in! um 83ch ’i '

c . '- “vow; .

L i r. .= ovsd ugl-"I'
-.. --~v—~o-—.v

J ’51:“. wk! (.1 _b . J.

 

a
3 .
L. If.
.1 l'
O
l'. h

440

And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you
received the word of God which you heard from us, you
accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is,
the word of God. . . . 2:13 RSV

 

 

2 Thessalonians

 

. . . God chose you from the beginning to be saved, through
sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth. To this he
called you through our gOSpel. . . . 2:14 RSV

 

Finally, brethren, pray for us, that the word of the
Lord may Speed on and triumph, as it did among you. . . .
3:1 RSV

Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord
Jesus Christ. . . . 3:12 RSV

1 Corinthians

 

Paul, called by the will of God to be an apostle. . . . 1:1 RSV

For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the
gospel. . . . For the word of the cross is folly to those who are
perishing, but to uS who are being saved it is the power of God.

1:17, 18 RSV

 

. . . my Speech and my message were not in plausible words
of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and power, that
your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power
of God. ' Yet among the mature we do impart wisdom, although
it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who
are doomed to pass away. But we impart a secret and hidden
wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages. . . .
2:4-7 RSV

 

 

And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but
taught by the Spirit. . . . 2:13 RSV

What then is Apollos? What is Paul? Servants through whom
you believed, as the Lord assigned to each. 3:5 RSV

  
       

.4,“
I

1:.
!; *1»- We!

. o
«J ‘.

'J—a u‘r—QJ ——_'_‘ A. '
7.. .._ L. .
'

«...—.4

_D . .‘
‘20'
’

...”..-

s

\

. v \
_ ......gu.f-:‘.p

  

. . , .Y.
L L . . . - .I. .Jno “nob: ,. .
I' '

     
  
  
    

. _ .. ‘-1 .\ . 1'th 1:15 I» I'
~ . .. .1;< :.I '7le ho -.
' ~ . loll-MLL‘I- 3} [’l'ui,.,
. . . .I'( L"! ,’
‘K
...r Dino
. - _ .. /' ... ‘- , , ‘ EFC‘ 3”"!
» - - ~ « IittI i339.» ,
- k. '-' I ; :nth‘I

. "1
I ~ » [5“"1 1' .-
-- (m. b .
_ U.
. .
L I" ‘h.
- I
~ I ' a n
'L.\"‘. 1;...” 1 : j 310'

i I

,. L . J 4)
L L . - I‘ L . Liar}, Y“! ,y. -.
‘f ., ' ; - I. . . with man“ {if

- - ' .' L I‘... . .:'. 3:; Y bn'ffl
. , n,
., ,

. . .
; 5. - LIL- ' 341/r. ._.

£3?!- *.5..;J';(fl_er23’

LI .1. ‘z' I ed: as chad . .
C

441

According to the commission of God given to me, like a skilled
master builder I laid a foundation. . . . 3:10 RSV

This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ and
stewards of the mysteries of God. 4:1 RSV

Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are
not you my workmanship in the Lord? 9: 1 RSV

For if I preach the gOSpel, that gives me no ground for boast-
ing. For necessity is laid upon me. Woe to me if I do not
preach the gOSpel'. . . . I am entrusted with a commission.
9:16, 17 RSV
f'

If any one thinks that he is a pr0phet, or Spiritual, he Should
acknowledge that what I am writing to you is a command of the
Lord. 14:37 RSV

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also
received. . . . 15:3 RSV

 

 

 

Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.
For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle,
because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of

God I am what I am, and his grace toward me was not in vain.

On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them, though it

was not I, but the grace of God which is with me. 15:8-10 RSV

2 Corinthians

 

Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God. . . .
1:1 RSV

. . . you Show that you are a letter from Christ delivered
by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God.
. . . Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to claim anything as
coming from us; our sufficiency is from God, who has qualified
us to be ministers. . . . 3:3,5,6 RSV

 

 

For what we preach iS not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord,
with ourselves as your servants for Jesus' sake. . . . But we
have this treasure in earthen vessels, to Show that the transcend-
ent power belongs to God and not to us. 4:5, 7 RSV

   

:03 all: ..

 

w ‘w '> ‘ - I
' '; r'.--.I;ii,!1':.
.
L , - mm. z: ,
. L L‘ "up LI'I‘
‘ \ ‘1 ~ 3 1 l
.
a \ a , a ‘L \I
I
_y ‘
4 . j.
.
‘ ”5’41"...
. r
‘ II! I
a u ‘ x
L , _. L
if
_ L ,._
' ‘ L L I ;» MM ,1 JD
' L 'L“ I : -:}rI.
’. ' :JL. ’L.'r'!(.,(fi
L 'L‘ . .1 ( .21" ML H
. L - '1 Lth s 3.5th
L _ L I .11: u my; mrfi ~
,1 , :. . . . . 3:381:71, -
e 1-‘ n I . If
-m. I/ yr,
3.5:. 1:. x «v.0.-- 511 If _,
. ,L 7 .7- 13‘ .
; , J. P I .. .
I (3 Laurie?
I.
l ' .7‘
- ," ,

442

So we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through
us. We beseech you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.
._-. . Working together with him, then, we entreat you. . . .

5:20; 6:1 RSV

 

For even if I boast a little too much of our authority, which the
Lord gave for building you up and not for destroying you, I shall
not be put to shame. . . . we will not boast beyond limit, but
will keep to the limits God has apportioned us. . . . 10:8, 13 RSV

 

 

. . I will go on to visions and revelations of the Lord. I know
a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third
heaven. . . . 12:1, 2 RSV

The Signs of a true apostle were performed among you in all
patience, with signs and wonders and mighty works. 12:12 RSV

I write this while I am away from you, in order that when I come

I may not have to be severe in my use of the authority which the
Lord has given me. . . . 2 Cor 13:10 RSV

Galatians

 

Paul an apostle-~not from men nor through man, but
through Jesus Christ and God the Father. . . . 1:1 RSV

Am I now seeking the favor of men, or ofIGod, Or am I
trying to please men? If I were still pleasing men, I Should not
be a servant of Christ. 1:10 RSV

For I would have you know, brethren, that the gOSpel which

was preached by me is not man's gosPel. For I did not receive
it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through a revelation
of Jesus Christ. . . . 1:11, 12 RSV

Philippian S

 

Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus . . . Grace
to you and peace from God our Father. . . . 1:1, 2 RSV

. . . it is‘my eager exPectation and hOpe that I Shall not be at
all ashamed, but that with full courage now as always Christ

E
to“ u- "
.'Ifllgci'IQ. .
.:'
l’
d 1. .1:

3.1:?
L

1.1.
I .
..LLL
.(‘

v

‘v! t.‘

...;r[ 1 wow
.89
m c.

.1’ .,
I
\

---

I

23.31.!
.I. . u
.I.. u.M|-alllu).l.

Lt I- v I. n u
.‘1 nu? .ta'% 4.

I I

 

443

will be honored in my body, whether by life or by death. For to
me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. 1:20, 21 RSV

. . . in every way, . . . Christ is proclaimed. . . . 1:18 RSV

But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of
Christ. Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the sur-
passing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake
I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as refuse,
in order that I may gain Christ. . . . that I may know him and
the power of his resurrection. . . . Not that I have already
obtained this or am already perfect; but I press on to make it

my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. 3:7-10, 12
RSV

 

Philemon

 

Paul, a prisoner for Christ Jesus. . . . Grace to you and
peace from God our Father and the' Lord Jesus Christ. vs 1, 3
RSV

Accordingly, though I am bold enough in Christ to com-
mand you to do what is required, yet for love's sake I prefer to
appeal to you--I, Paul, an ambassador and now a prisoner also
for Christ Jesus. . . . vs 8,9 RSV

 

 

These are typical rather than exhaustive quotations from the seven
epistles, but they suffice to answer clearly in the affirmative the first
four questions prOposed.

The fifth question inquired whether Paul made extensive use of
inartistic proofs, and whether these were given more weight than the
artistic proofs of his own devising.

The gospel message which Paul claimed to have received by
revelation is both an inartistic proof and the chief burden of all his
messages. With great emphasis he declares that he did not preach the

gOSpel with the primary purpose in mind of pleasing men.l Furthermore,

 

l1 Thess 2:4, Gal 1:10-12.

+Ln‘u—

, ... . _M.’ l—‘J."o‘"‘w

, l

o ‘u- 1.
'u

 

:;._ ;\ ._-.
3‘"

  
 

1' .

  

.1 ‘LrI-I I’ ' m. _I'xfirhk'; 2. .'..I1
§ 1
, ~46 .

. r4 r;; Inf: 3

 
  
   
     
 
 

. ‘\ I"? ‘ i '.’\nv’&I__'
'PLE‘MI. =1}: (JV _“-

v'

, A ‘.
Cur owns.» 1:
U
:s
-_-r
r I/ gt: l_‘
- ': -..;Zu‘lu

1 .:‘:li 1.0 --I

LJ’- ,OL‘III .

IL.L'L.". (12,};I’h-I

' . 21d '10 n 81-:

1‘ I. page“: 3.9 ; ._

, .521: {.19 39.573 "II-4,.

7‘ .-_ —L_.«-...L.

444

the Apostle insisted that it was the afflatus of the Holy Spirit which
gave potency to his words. 1 In addition to this, an examination of
Nestle's Greek New Testament, which places in heavy type the Old
Testament references used by New Testament writers, discloses

that Paul constantly quoted from the Old Testament as a ready-made
source of evidence. Such passages are usually cited in highly strategic
points in the arguments of the epistles as can be readily perceived by
even a cursory reading of Galatians chapters three and four, and other
sections of the letters.

DeSpite these facts, it should be recognized that the Apostle did
practice a measure of audience adaptation. The differences in style
manifested by Galatians, Corinthians, and Philemon demonstrate this.
To the Galatians, Paul is sternly emphatic, but to the Corinthians,
who lived in a less favorable environment, he is infinitely more tender
and cautious in expression. In the personal letter to Philemon, he is
even playful, and diSplays marvellous tact. To the Open-hearted and
ingenuous Philippians, Paul acts with a correSponding lack of reserve.
He is never a mere amanuensis in the hand of God, for his messages
evidence the full measure of his own rich personality. He is God's
penman, but not God's pen, for none knew better than he that "the
Torah must Speak in the language of men. ”

Thus we find that the Apostle willingly chose to rely heavily on
inartistic proofs, but he incorporated these skillfully in rhetorical
settings determined by the nature of the occasion and the audience.

In question seven it was inquired whether Paul's adaptation to his
audiences was secondary to his main purpose of conveying an authori-
tative and unchanging central message. Probably the answer to

question five indicates the true situation in this instance also.

 

11 Cor 2:4-7, l3; 1 Thess 1:5,6.

 

Hg "1 "

W
‘;n. .; 5’15!“ 519

‘r'w/rUJ gfligh. . ;__
.|

;' "
my L‘ :nJ 39359“; "'

u L:
, L
- \
. L
t
c c
.
L "?
«
.
1’
v J; I
.
Ll".
MUV
‘ ,.-~r
4'1b

_fi , u,;;;_:r'.wng
.'

' r ;, if'd'IfF-flflpba If

   
   
  
    
   
 
   
  
    
  
   
  
  

'Ji .u-j' waist}
.Q

,; 4.103,;

’ U 1‘99,
;‘ ~ :1 ”Au! '
- w .- 1m: wan-n; ‘

.. HUi-i‘lé}

L . . L vayjjfi but

t

L :1. "('10 '_‘_
Lip: ' ufif .f ‘.
‘ .V ,. ;.;11303k{

l , 5;. «(d .i‘
(“M-11115.” ' l
. ""

c g Z; HELD! L (I) "
,}
. L :_' I to Hi up".

‘

x -7."~ .135 , '1“

‘ '1 Izbv'qififn :1“
.

I
i J’" >23 11'! 111,3 ”(15'
. t.

' 3i vial/98 no

t
. 4

I
og' ‘r’,

S
.d

445

His emphasis upon a "given!' revelation insured that such should not

be sacrificed by concessions to the ”sorry nature of audiences. "

From the Apostle we have the express declaration: "If I were still
pleasing men, I should not be a servant of Christ" Gal 1:10. This
should not be understood as implying that he was unconcerned whether
his messages were adapted to the particular audience. We have already
seen that on each occasion he Spoke as one fully conscious of the
peculiarities involved in the Specific situation. The important point is
that Paul never emasculated the truths committed to him in order to
render them more acceptable. Similarly, the adaptation practiced by
him does not seem to have had as its planned purpose the manifestation
of personal proof. Such manifestation appears to'have been unconscious
rather than premeditated.

Does the evidence point beyond the profession of virtue by Paul to

 

his actual possession of the primary ethical qualities ? It might be

 

argued that it would be possible for someone to write as Paul did with-
out the actual possession of "good" character, but such seems most

unlikely. Firstly, it is apparent that the manifestations of ethos closely

 

parallel the subject matter themes of each discourse. Faith, hope,

love, truthfulness, honesty etc. are the themes of the Pauline messages.
This is not usually the case in those instances of secular oratory which
reveal considerable ethical proof. We would naturally expect that the
one who was so concerned about the development of such virtues would
himself possess them to a large degree. Secondly, those aspects of
style which seem blemishes from a purely rhetorical standpoint find
their explanation in the fact that Paul was more concerned with matter
than with method. For example, the frequent digressions indicate this
pre-occupation, and the sometimes lengthy and involved sentences

suggest the same. Thirdly, the evidence from Acts regarding Paul's

Wu ((H I

k .
.
‘L 'L ' I V'DL E
L;
|
I, V L i?
‘ L I, ‘ J.
E_ .'L,
» i
g;_ 3:1
U; .L ,51851!

    

y...
C;
(T
L"
b-
D,
Q
h
L "

, 51:3103 6-

-. . I

‘2‘ F. t :1 52:21:} E
. . . c.

-. unfli all: n: M

'1]. -"
';.::’. 1""); '7

 

446

character as seen through the eyes of another Should be taken into

account. This narrative written by a professional man (the "beloved
physician“) describes a Paul who corresponds to the Paul of the
epistles. The weight of available evidence indicates that the Apostle
actually possessed the virtues evinced by his ethical proof.

Finally, we ask--Do the Pauline discourses comply with the
modern homiletic dictum that preaching Should be "both an art and an
incarnation”? The answer can be drawn from the preceding. To Paul,
preaching was first and foremost an incarnation. His knowledge of
life, men, and letters, however, insured that his homiletic endeavours
represented even more than this. The foregoing chapters have Shown
that the discourses of the Apostle are capable of analysis according to
the classical criteria with results that are highly creditable to Paul.
On the other hand, when the work of this early preacher is viewed in
the light of modern homiletic theory, it becomes evident that while
these messages are certainly within the Sphere of oratory they repre-
sent oratory of a Specific kind. Paul's preaching was based upon the
fundamental premise of his ambassadorship for God, and it was this
which gave the motif for his addresses. Thus‘there is a striking
correSpondence between the Apostles's preaching practice and the
practice required by recent homiletic theory. Such a close relation-
ship calls for some exPlanation. To what extent has Paul been reSpons-
ible for the present trend in this area?

The books on preaching cited by Rudin make extensive reference
to Paul and his letters. Even some of the titles allude to the words

of Paul. These include Men of the Mysteries by Ralph W. Sockman,

 

The Ambassador by James E. Freeman, The Liberty of Pr0phesying

 

 

by Hensley H. Henson, Sufficient Ministers by Joseph M. Gray,

 

We Prophe_sy in Part by Willard L. Sperry, and others. This use made

 

447

of Paul in the titles of volumes on preaching rightly represents the
emphasis given to Pauline concepts and practice in modern homiletics.
To indicate that this emphasis is not new, we would introduce an
important witness from the fifth century.

Probably the most influential figure in the Christian church
since the time of Paul was St. Augustine. Modern homileticians,
whose Seminary training usually includes emphases upon Augustinian
thought, reflect the stamp of this former teacher of rhetoric who was
also the greatest of the Fathers of the Church. Because much of his

material in book four of Christian Instruction is highly pertinent to our

 

investigation, we quote from it at some length. Augustine pin-points
the relationship which exists between the rhetoric of Scripture writers
like Paul and that required of Christian preachers.

At this point, perhaps, someone may ask whether our authors,
whose divinely inSpired writings have formed the Canon with an
authority that is very beneficial for us, are only wise, or whether
they Should be designated as eloquent also. Certainly for myself
and for those who agree with me in what I maintain, this question
is very readily answered. For, when I understand them, it seems
to me that not only could no one be wiser, but also that no one
could be more eloquent than they are. And I venture to maintain
that all who understand correctly what those writers are saying
understand at the same time that they should not have said it any
other way. A certain kind of eloquence is more fitting for youth,
and another is more becoming for old age; so much so that we
Should not call it eloquence if it is not appr0priate for the person
of the Speaker. There is a kind of eloquence, then, which is
becoming for men eminently worthy of the highest authority and
manifestly inSpired by God. Biblical writers have spoken with
this kind of eloquence; no other kind becomes them, nor is that
kind suitable for other writers. It is appropriate for them, and
the more humble it seems to be, the higher it rises above others,
not because of its conceit, but because of its solidity. l

 

1John J. Gavigan (tr. ), "Christian Instruction, ” Saint Augustine,
Vol. IV of The Fathers of the Church ed. Ludwig Schopp e_t a}. (72 vols.;
New York: Cima Publishing Co., Inc., 1947), pp. 175-176.

 

 

.d’
I‘ _..‘E-o.
, A
...‘~

5'
-o
v
I -
1
~‘~
.-

' ...-an‘u
.
‘_J_

-4;

v
V . ‘
—..~\ "-.

. ..J Vault!
. ~ 1;, mum.

w. L.‘ Joanna ‘1‘.

-- A“- - ~‘c
‘.

444151" -'
.lej

v idea-r "

1m :1 Wm, "
t

,2! i’wf, ai :‘
,- fur-3.?“ 58'.
.:‘ u vii:
- .n cue-dafxf»

\ (_.r: min:
;:.3 3L‘15m1.‘ I
.~(13w*
_ u r
Li 'Jud -v~‘ .
Hire 30“, -. ‘7')”
.:cyisaqa.
. $1.1 3(1‘T '
. 5313118411 Y n
;; ujmt‘ lb 1!} . "
3.1.021‘ :- j?
. . J. {(13, '2,
,2 3; Llcmimi a. '

’ E

. ," 7'
._‘-;" ,(.;r)r?ngf1$0 .;
. c; _. embed, f.

,L
)- v1

3
1
i
i
a

 

448

Still, if there were time, I could point out to those who
set their own language ahead of that of our writers (not because
of its greatness but because of its extravagance) that all the
qualities and oratorical ornaments they boast about are found in
the sacred writings of those whom divine Providence has provided
to instruct us and lead us from this wicked world to the blessed
one. It is not what these men have in common with pagan orators
and poets that gives me more pleasure in that eloquence than I
can say. I feel greater admiration and surprise because they have
used our eloquence in a way which is all their own, so that it is
neither lacking nor~ostentatious in them. It was not right for them
either to condemn eloquence nor to make a display of it. The
former would have happened if they had avoided it, and the latter
could have been believed of them if they had made their eloquence
easily recognizable. And, in those places where it happens to be
recognized by the learned, such matters are being discussed that
the words by which they are expressed seem not to have been
sought after by the speaker, but to have been associated naturally
with those very matters, as if you were to understand wisdom as
going out of her home, that is, the heart of the wise man, and

eloquence like an inseparable servant following her even though
unbidden. 1

Augustine proceeds to give examples of eloquence from the epistles of
Paul, and then declares:

It would be tedious to recount other examples or to indicate
these in other passages of the Holy Scriptures. What if I had
tried to point out also the figures of Speech which are taught in
the art of rhetoric and are present in those passages at least
which I have quoted from the Apostle's eloquence? Is it not true
that thoughtful men would more readily have believed that I am
going to excess rather than that any students would have felt
that I was meeting their needs? When all these principles are
taught by masters, they are considered of great value, are pur-
chased at a high price, and are sold with considerable diSplay.

I myself have a dread of being tainted by that ostentation while I
am discussing these matters in this way. However, I must give
an answer to the ill-informed men who believe that our authors
Should be deSpised not because they do not possess, but because
they do not make a display of, the eloquence which those others
value too highly. 2

 

llbid., pp. 176-177.
21bid., pp. 181-182.

V
-1; . L-‘lLrU Ll HUM,
'-,- I‘erLJ 11‘ '. O '§~

:us ;I 31:91 ' '
:.' :w ( 1ij ED ;\.('
J..' 1‘. lye/1*, ~
, 91:11:33”
Jr a mi 33‘
I. JI‘I'II U300“
LL'...I ”(5‘
,. r is 1110 ~
.r1 1%“;
c ld'-{XT1 '13 7

[HI] :5 c

\

s I 11“.?

LLI‘ av“! b f~
'I. ,’ ’ £481 YJ‘L}:

I “'i losing. Ir.‘

I :3: rear
. I1 '

‘4 LJlfi 3113' r

02* ...-um ..I.

L ' Ir SIN-8‘

L: .I'.‘ tum ... »

(.nabb .

W 3:14 I; of 4.1.".—

. ..cd': '10. a

. L-Jr . ,, svmlffi
;: .'rr'fldln'uu’ '
iii-”7.0 o .

.'Jbom c -.

 

449

And in another place, after discussing a Scriptural example of oratory
Augustine adds:

Indeed, many points which apply to the rules of eloquence
can be discovered in this very passage which I have used as an
example. A sincere reader is not so much instructed when he
carefully analyzes it as he is set on fire when he recites it with
glowing feeling. For, not by human effort were these words de-
vised; they have been poured forth from the Mind of God both
wisely and eloquently, so that wisdom was not bent upon eloquence,
nor did eloquence separate itself from wisdom. As some very
eloquent and intelligent men could observe and maintain, if those
principles which are learned in the art of oratory could not be
reSpected, observed, and brought to these teachings, unless they
were first discovered in the natural ability of orators, is it any
wonder that they are discovered in those men sent by Him who
creates natural abilities? Therefore, let us admit that our
canonical writers and teachers were not only wise, but truly elo-

quent, with such an eloquence as was apprOpriate for persons
of this kind. 1

Augustine not only gives from the writings of Paul examples of
the three classic styles, but he argues from the words of the Apostle
the necessity for the preacher's employing the best style possible on
each and every occasion.

A teacher like this, in order to make his words persuasive,
eXpresseS himself without shame, not only in the subdued and
moderate style, but even in the grand style, because he lives
uprightly. He chooses a good life in such a way that he does not
disregard a good reputation, but as far as possible, takes fore-
thought for what is 'honorable in the sight of God and men, ' by
fearing God and taking care of men. Even in his very speech he
should choose to please by his subjects rather than by his words,
and not believe that a thing is better expressed unless it is
expressed more truthfully. The teacher should not be a slave to
words, but the words should be subject to the teacher. This is
what the Apostle says: 'Not with the wisdom of words, lest the
cross of Christ be made void. ' What he says to Timothy has
this meaning, too: 'Do not dispute with words, for that is useless,
leading to the ruin of the listeners. ' This was not said so that
we would not say anything in defense of truth when our enemies

 

lIbid., p. 187.

 

 

L v 1 L L .L «J...
L L: . . .L
L v . 1 L
L L L
L L L L I L
_ L L
L L L L , c
. L t
L L
x \ L
. L L ,
L
L L t L L
L
L
: x L
L L L
.. L L
L
L L L
L
L L L . L L L L
L
~ _ L
I L
L L L L
L L
L L x
L L L
L L L
L L
L 3t!
..I in .
1.7.0.4-.
.-.. x
’ I ~,
.vu.,
r...
«\n

. .0! N. .‘
2.ng

-. ,. *5... ...Lu
....L..hk\fawl.’gm

L

...)

Spar

. . WWW... 3.1....th .l

I . .

l ‘ .t‘
I .

f
*1 {air-... .I.- ... £111.. ll.
.

it , 0.-.»..Iw

 

 

450

are attacking it. Where shall we place what he said when he

was explaining, among other things, what kind of man a bishop
should be: 'That he may be able in sound doctrine also to con-
fute opponents' ? Disputing with words is not being solicitous
how error may be overcome by truth, but how your eloquence
may be preferred to another's. A man who does not diSpute

with words, whether he Speaks in the subdued, the moderate,

or the grand style, strives by means of his words to make truth
clear, pleasing, and persuasive. Even charity itself, which is
the end and 'fulfillrnent of the Law, ' cannot be right in any way,
if the things which are loved are not true but false. Moreover,
just as one whose body is handsome, but whose mind is deranged,
is more to be pitied than if his body also were misshapen, so
those who say eloquently things that are false are more to be
pitied than if they said such things inelegantly. Therefore, in
what does Speaking, not only eloquently, but also wisely, consist
except in employing adequate words in the subdued style,
brilliant ones in the moderate style, and forceful ones in the
grand style, yet always on a subject which deserves to be heard?
Whoever cannot do both should Speak wisely what he does not say
eloquently, rather than speak eloquently what he says foolishly. 1

St. Augustine draws also from Paul in his discussion on Ethos.

 

However, in causing his words to be persuasive, the life
of a Speaker has greater influence than any sublimity of eloquence,
no matter how great it may be. A man who Speaks wisely and
eloquently, but leads a wicked life, does indeed teach many who
are desirous of learning, yet, as it is written, he is 'unprofitable
to his own soul.‘ Hence the Apostle says: 'whether in pretense
or in truth, Christ is being proclaimed. ' However, Christ is
'Truth' and truth can still be preached even though not with truth,
that is, that what is virtuous and true may be preached from a
vicious and deceitful heart. So, Jesus Christ is truly preached by
those who 'Seek their own interests, not those of Jesus Christ. '
However, good Christians do not obey any man at all, but the Lord
Himself who said: 'The things they command do; but do not do the
things they do; for they talk but do nothing.‘ For that reason,
even those who do not lead useful lives are heard with profit.
They are diligent about seeking their own ends, but, naturally,
they do not dare to teach their own doctrines from the pulpit of
ecclesiastical authority, which sound teaching has established.
For this reason the Lord Himself, before He said what ‘I have

 

l1pm., pp. 231-232.

, " , (9.2-: .703“

    
    
 
  
  
  
   
    

mi ‘JJ (I I
' ‘. ’: gram -

‘.‘. ,: I1I‘10

I. l3

. . . L.“ LLle‘ . - {w
. ‘ 'r ..
L ' ’11-: .:‘.1‘1 “
‘ ‘ . ‘_ .‘q'. .1111]; .4 _.‘,
L L , {:2 niolq r .
L ‘ ;' “n1; .4! ‘
..
- ~ ~ . HTML? ,- i

f,t' 'Lllf a:
V
oJezr. 1‘;

' _v-I ‘I-mf'Ju-o
_ .. IL Ilser Q14;
» ‘ . .1' '. Canb' .‘w
_ L L Q!"
r“ L'L .-..
‘Ip‘. > . .
‘” ‘
b x f
‘N
I, I
O. "
- L , LI'IU"~'OH'
L L L ~ ‘ I’ manage.
. \ L. " (I 103'!
I.

.:m 9.1.,»

l ‘ .
, L L L L
; . ; .. . v' 313d:

I . L ~ L , 1:, L: .:If Iona
11;” ‘ , , ' - L In - _ ,_ L L- M . 358’. o
' I" “Haj: ‘ , - . : 5; ‘ . 1 . ' . : . .7 I. n Mug A

‘ " ~ .; :. j . v f; ‘. i; . ,. :'. LFIV ' :' int; uh}!
‘ . L’ ' . L .I .. .. f- f; :01 ;c-I- .
_:'.E 7:1. , L' L . ..L' I" .I'L; .. r. mlw er-III
, : .r '_ . ‘33; , _- 1,L.'; ,. I. ‘L; : :lrIr ['33 wean; _,
_ -' ' IL ‘ , , 1?: ‘1! '5 I15; I, a 0:51) 333

.‘L51l7.",’ 37.1; "" , .1.

swgf'lfi‘szv; .‘:,%..I :1 5. . L', LL- ,.

 

I.
A'all
‘.-I ’

 

451

related about such men, declared: 'They have sat on the chair
of Moses. ' That chair, then, which was not theirs but Moses',
compelled them to Speak what was good, even though they were
not doing good. They accomplished their own purposes in their
own lives, but the chair which belonged to another did not permit
them to teach their own doctrines.

And so, they benefit many by preaching what they do not
practise, but they would benefit far greater numbers by prac-
tising what they preach. For, there are many who seek a defense
of their own evil lives in their directors and teachers, replying
in their hearts, or even with their lips (if they give vent to this
extent), and saying: 'Why do you not practise yourself what you
are preaching to me?‘ The result is that they do not listen with
submission to a man who does not listen to himself. They deSpise
the word of God which is being preached to them, and at the same
time they despise the preacher himself. In fact, when the Apostle,
writing to Timothy, had said: 'Let no man despise thy youth, '
and added how he was to avoid being despised, he said: 'but be
thou an example to the faithful in Speech, in conduct, in charity,
in faith, in chastity. '1

Taking into account, therefore, both the testimony of the ancient
homiletician Augustine and that which proceeds from his modern counter-
parts, we can assay an answer to the question regarding the extent of
Paul's influence on homiletic theory. The Apostle's influence has un-
questionably been one of the major factors in molding current preaching
ideals if not THE major one. It should be recognized, however, that
not only the authors of the epistles, but the pr0phets of the Old Testa-
ment and, indeed, every writer of Scripture has contributed to the
distinctive tenets of the homiletic tradition. This is understandable
inasmuch as the Bible writers, almost without exception, were also
preachers in their own right.

We believe that the conclusions of Rudin regarding "the concept

of ethos in late American preaching" are complementary to the present

 

1Ibid., pp. 229—231.

452

rhetorical analysis of Paul's epistles. They account for the diverg-
encies from classical rhetoric in certain particulars, revealing that
the fundamental premises of ambassadorship and authority found in

preaching require not merely the evincing but also the possession of

the qualities of ethos. The oratory of the one who purports to convey

 

the absolutes of heaven should exemplify both art and incarnation.

In Paul's case, this ideal appears to have been realized.

CHAPTER VIII

THE RELEVANCE OF PAULINE ETHICS FOR
MODERN COMMUNICATION

Can it be denied that so fearsomely potent a force
as rhetoric participates in moral values? Is it the case
that any instrument which affects human life is not sub-
ject to moral assessment? Aristotle affirmed the moral
neutrality of rhetoric; Plato's answer to both these ques-
tions was an emphatic negative. When in recent history
we find the clamorous Spirit of fanaticism at large in the
world sustained by rhetorical discourse; when we con-
template the undiminished and undiminishing potentiality
for savagery latent in all men, waiting to be triggered
by suasive language; and when we observe the SoPhists
of our time, rationally discredited but thriving still, we
may begin to suSpect that after all Plato was even wiser
than we had thought. 1

Things fall apart; the center cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world;

The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity. 2

 

lEdwin Black, "Plato's View of Rhetoric, " Quarterly Journal
of Speech, Vol. 44 (December 1958), p. 374.

 

 

2William Butler Yeats, The Second Coming, cited by Nathan A. -
Scott, Jr. , The Broken Center (New York: The National Council, ‘
1959), p. 1.

No attempt has been made in this chapter to outline Paul's ethi-
cal code in a specific way because it consists mainly of principles
familiar in name at least to most Westerners from childhood. Concise
ethical summaries in the Apostle's own words are to be found in
Romans ch 12, 1 Thessalonians chs 4 and 5, Ephesians ch 5, and
1 Corinthians ch 13.

Our objective here is to inquire into the need for a revival of
ethical values in communication, and to suggest that Pauline ethics
are the most appropriate, to fulfill the existing need.

453

 

 

454

In 1848, Marx and Engels, in their Manifesto of the Communist

 

Party, wrote that "law, morality, religion are . . . so many bourgeois
interests. "1 In the same document they emphasized that "man's ideas,
views and conceptions, in one word, man's consciousness, changes

with every change in the condition of his material existence, in his
social relations and in his social life. "7‘ Such statements added flame

to the fires of the materialistic phiIOSOphy of the preceding age of the
Enlightenment. By the end of the century it seemed apparent that the
theory of Charles Darwin concerning man's evolutionary development
substantiated the positivism of men like Marx. Nietzsche realized the
implications of Darwinism, and hailed the passing of God and the en-
thronement of the power-motivated "superman" in His place. Following
the death of Nietzsche, the works of Sigmund Freud made their impact
upon the world suggesting to many that man, like his primeval ancestors,
was glandularly controlled rather than rationally.

These events were the antecedents of the modern era of ethical
chaos in the realm of communication and other areas. With the
demotion of man as a Spiritual being came the tumbling of ethical
pillars which had mainly rested on metaphysical foundations.

”Give man a concept of what he is, and he will do what
he ought, " is a philosoPhical observation which seems to have
been confirmed by history.

Conversely, when we give man a concept of himself
which does not extend beyond the pleasure-pain dimensions of
his being, he will not Spontaneously undertake duties no matter
what efforts are made to have him do so.3

 

lManifesto of the Communist Party, cited by Carl Henry, The
Drift of Western Thought (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co. ,
1951), p. 60.

zlbid., p. 60.

3Ana Maria O'Neill, Ethics for the Atomic Age (Boston: Meador
Publishing Company, 1948), p. 74.

 

 

 

 

 

l ' ... o

L

. . .
.- .I.! f”... '3 ufiw,
L t I. v v! n

 

. . .... .
: , . .
. F3531“

II.

: r .
\l\.

 

  

 

 

   

455

Thus with man's change of concept regarding himself and the universe
there has come a subsequent revolution of thought concerning ethics.

These two are ever linked. Ethics are always based on a Weltanschauung,

 

and its basic presuppositions are drawn from the world-view which is

its parent. Thus it has been truly said concerning our day that--”the

essential nature of the crisis through which we are living is neither

military, nor political, nor economic, but moral. "1 [emphasis ours]
Sorokin asserts the same when he says:

This means that the main issue of our times is not democracy
versus totalitarianism, nor liberty versus despotism; neither is
it capitalism versus communism, nor pacifism versus militarism,
nor internationalism versus nationalism, nor any of the current
pOpular issues daily proclaimed by statesmen and politicians,
professors and ministers, journalists and soapbox orators. All
these pOpular issues are but small side issues--mere by-products
of the main issue, namely, the sensate form of culture and way of
life versus another, different form. 2

Or as he puts it elsewhere in the same work:

The essence of the crisis consists in a progressive devalu-
ation of our ethics and of the norms of our law. This devaluation
has already gone so far that, strange as it may seem, they have
lost a great deal of their prestige as ethical and juridical values.
They have little, if any, of the sanctity with which such values
and norms were formerly invested. More and more, present-
day ethical values are looked upon as mere "rationalizations, "
”derivations, " or "beautiful Speech reactions" veiling the ego-
tistic interests, pecuniary motives, and acquisitive pr0pensities
of individuals and groups. Increasingly they are regarded as a
smoke screen masking prosaic interests, selfish lusts, and, in
particular, greed for material values. Legal norms, likewise,
are increasingly considered as a device of the group in power

 

1Edward H. Carr, Conditions of Peace, p. 113, cited byhAna
Maria O'Neill, Ethics for the Atomic Age (Boston: Meador Publishing
Company, 1948), p. 389.

2P. A. Sorokin, The Crisis of Our Age (New York: E. P.
Dutton and Co., Inc., 1946), p. 22.

 

 

 

 

. 5,1 I
‘ (I‘I'
LL M ii

NO.

31‘. n 7‘ 3s;

  
    
   

v .I.
L I with"
(Ii-fit: a.
L.,".1‘III£3 '7"-
I $.1-r93n15:(
" ‘9' In "..L '18...

tutti)“--
L: '.l 1 .r Aurjq q --' '
_; Kath; A 11.-“1' 1+;
, L .12: 1». 'ttm'xpv'xg ‘__‘
.LJ 1. L‘IL' 313"

LL I t was. z-d'l"
[(1.15 'lUtx‘ ’-
LI ,t‘. "80550?
I; .rL.‘ 3:401:33
‘3 i. .. J”:I 5V" #3:;
.5 4.12.9.1 um'
._ I: fIIIB‘n’ 1170 -~
I,' 'I " .Emo‘
L "L r 5:32.019",
r. : I: r i: 3188!? I, 1‘ z (
4.1;: 1:551 '
W1 “55 '19. .1.
‘3: r -' ‘flfifliffiu’ .,

456

for exPloiting other, less powerful, groups--a form of trickery
employed by the dominant class for the subjugation and control
of the subordinate classes. Ethical and juridical norms have
both become mere rouge and powder to deck out a fairly un-
attractive body of Marxian economic interests, Paretian
”residues, " Freudian ”libido, " Ratzenhoger "interests, " the
psychologists' and sociologists' "complexes, " "drives, " and
"preponent reflexes. " They have turned into mere appendages
of policemen, prisons, the electric chair, "pressures, " and the
other forms of physical force. They have lost their moral
prestige and have been degraded and demoted to the status of a
device, used by clever hypocrites to fool the exploited simple-
tons.1

The dream described by Dostoyevsky in the Epilogue of Crime

and Punishment seems to be a parable concerning this age as foreseen

 

by the author. Aware of the significance of the new matter and method
in current communication, Dostoyevsky pictures the whole world under
process of disintegratidn because of a terrible and strange plague.
New kinds of microbes possessing intelligence and will attacked the
bodies of men. Those who were infected became mad and furious.

But ”never had men considered themselves so intellectual and so com-
pletely in possession of the truth as these sufferers, never had they
considered their decisions, their scientific conclusions, their moral

..z Entire towns, cities, and nations went

convictions so infallible.
insane because of the infection. In their fury they could no longer
understand one another. "Each thought that he alone had the truth and

was wretched looking at the others. . . . They did not know how to

 

judge and could not agree what to consider evil and what good. "3

 

 

lIbid., p. 157.

szodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment (New York: The
Modern Library, Random House, Inc., 1950), p. 528.

 

3Ibid., p. 528, (emphasis ours).

   
   
  
   
   
   
   
    
   
  
 
  
  

IV ‘ '- ~ - ' Ly ‘z‘w'fiv wift" 7v L ~
“ I I 7 It I LI ‘h'ki 3.910;
' ‘ I . L ‘ t L LJI IL:L'8 ="v'_~'_"
. . ‘ 1’ . 5 ff" '18“ :
t ‘4 . d 1 l1: 7
I'; L ‘.'-;:¢llbj‘
I " mi, (dc-rin-

. ... LL 2." LtlkbqaL, ‘

L. L L . , . ‘ ;J‘-b911'

[ .
L I

L L L J
\
h .I.
L L -LL. Arc-(mist
I ~ ~ -' .‘IHIH
‘ : , L I iI‘ ! H. {I ... M'
['I\
("'LLIIjrzj’ Iri-
L _ L luxmca‘,
fr
~ 5 ~ I " .13me V.
‘ ‘ a . L L L ' I‘L; I [lid-’1.-
o-f "

L . —, . . L I.I'.I::wneoq .:';

v ~ . - ~ 9 .’ Ji‘f u 7&5th Ur
.ag

     

" r L " .L ‘ L‘:iL:r;i 08 .,. 1,,‘

Vrp'y'lt

war”

‘12— -
._ A,

.— * L . .7 . .‘. e:..‘r lo gens.
L L ‘ L . : I'LLr‘rsz; can 5:;

L L L. Iemulka'

.TCI .qr

L ~. L ) L L L .( I I'L‘(’I38f1n:‘

/' ' ., L ,r'”
x. c l. t n p. - {.:u' {Ya

457

In senseless rage they killed one another with their armies. All day
long, alarms rang in the towns and cities, but when men rushed to-
gether they were unable to find why or by whom they had been summoned.
Trades were abandoned, and the land was permitted to lie fallow.

”Men met in groups, agreed on something, swore to keep together, but
at once began on something quite different from what they had proposed.
They accused one another, fought and killed each other. "1 Conflagra-
tions and famine Spread over the world until "all men and all things

HZ

were involved in destruction. Dostoyevsky concludes his description

by saying:

Only a few men could be saved in the whole world. They were
a pure chosen people, destined to found a new race and a new
life, to renew and purify the earth, but no one had seen these
men, no one had heard their words and their voices.3

This remarkable narrative portrays many aSpects of the tragedy
of this mid-twentieth century and suggests what may yet lie ahead.
It is most significant that Dostoyevsky points out that a distinguishing
characteristic of the crisis which he pictures was the fact that the
pe0ple “did not know how to judge and could not agree what to consider
evil and what good. " That is to say, they possessed no agreed-upon
ethical values. It is this characteristic, according to many diagnos—
ticians of our times, which particularly marks the present human
dilemma.

That communication today in many areas both reflects and
fosters ethical chaos is the theme of the present essay. The world

crisis is actually the crisis of communication. It has arisen through

 

lIbid., p. 529.
ZIbid.
31bid.

 

 

458

both communication and the lack of it. Events do not happen in a
vacuum. It is the verbal interchange between nations, communities,
and individuals that precipitates change. It is the projection of

thought by orators, politicians, scientists, literary figures, philoso-
phers, and others that has created our troubled age. It is the wide-
spread influence of communicated concepts which has brought "Mind

to the End of its Tether, " to borrow a phrase from one who was
originally an Optimistic prophet of a coming Utopia. 1 As a man announces
his thought by words, so an age manifests its true nature by the quality
of its various forms of communication. Therefore, it is proposed to
array in this chapter some of the evidence that prevalent forms of
communication reveal the necessity for a revival of ethical values.
There need be no apology for this stress upon ethics. Every competent
student of world affairs recognizes such a stress as the urgent need of
the times.

If it has not been evident to men before that we must be
guided in our social life by universal and necessary ethical
rules, it certainly is clear today. With the nations trembling
for fear as the west and the east feel each other out for a Third
World War; with stock piles of atom bombs being kept in order
'just in case'; with world diplomats vetoing each other out of
commission; with starvation, disease, and death marking the
aftermath of the recently consummated world-holocaust; and
with the threat of economic revolution looming over the entire
human race, one can appreciate why even the followers of the
scientific method are meeting together in seminars throughout
the length and breadth of the country, discussing what can be
done to protect civilization from utter destruction in an atom-
bomb war. Such discussion is good and necessary. . . . z

 

1H. G. Wells, Mind at the End of Its Tether (New York: Didier,

zEdward John Carnell, An Introduction to Christian Apologetics
(Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1956), p. 315.

 

 

   
  
   
  
     
    
      
  
  

I

I' adj I m; NILJM
Lit}: lulu; at“ 1
LI a 'lULLI‘.thh3 zr~

; cunt ,.:‘J(J~‘8

V_ I VI. 31‘ :3 i'ttwa" “
LuIUNHB :-

; “,L'..3L 'V 333-t u‘.
y _ L. ‘ If! iJ(:‘I a!

\' ‘7 I- 1ft tad 'r)’o"'

! -.." I 11005va »

L L-L I -’l .‘mztf :13 31.”.
u i 'Jr-nj "
L L t 5.13:
: L32"
L-Heano

. Ixfl ;Lclq‘

\ L L Ht: in {m
L.(Nw3dyt:

: .GD.§ ‘ I,

L 'L" “113$“: ';LV,L
.rz-L'L'v'I has :5 53‘. ,

.,A._ .
L LL- LLLLLLL—L... -9‘
L ELLEL «931$.
‘ . 7(1-
r’ '

V.
I '\
'-
‘7'
.7
1'." '
~-

 

459

At one time Ethics might have been considered a dull
hobby of a duller academician. This is not true today. Ethics
is the incisive and universal requisite for survival. . . .
Theological sanctions discarded, the modern man covets only
social, and sometimes only individual, approval of his behavior.
The sense of ethical imperative is evaporating from one range
of life after another. The obligation to durable principles is
no longer insisted upon. The soul of the twentieth-century man
no longer feeds on objective and eternal norms, but is content
with ethical leftovers.

One fact is certain: simultaneous with this relativity of
moral imperatives, human life has lost its worth. The soul-
nausea and dread of modern man has reached depths unknown
even to the ancient Greek Skeptic. The sense of cosmic lostness
and of personal insignificance frames modern man's window on
life.

On a mass scale, the value of human existence is almost
totally discounted. The nadir of man's worth finds its supreme
illustrations not in the deeds of earlier centuries, but in those
of our own: barbarism in Nazi concentration camps; brutal
state compulsion under Soviet totalitarianism; slave labor camps;
suspension of human rights upon the whim of political machines;
scientific devotion to weapons efficient for wholesale death-
dealing; mass atomic destruction of whole civilian populations
(Nagasaki and Hiroshima) by world powers promoting the cause
of human dignity. The power which awes modern man is his
capacity to destroy a million lives a minute, to eradicate the
vestiges of civilization almost overnight, to shake the very globe
on which he exists. In our day the "might makes right" credo of
Thrasymachus and Machiavelli and Nietzsche has become a
politico-social option beyond the worst dreams of the tyrants who
shaped it. .

The dissolved and lost value of human life is a fact not only
in the aggregate, but in the individual composition of society.
The evaporation of ethical restraints has emptied life of meaning
and of sense of destiny. The fibres of morality have disinte-
grated in society, in fact, because they first deteriorated in the
family. Basic to the chaos in social ethics stands the decline
of personal moral conviction and its accompanying sense of
futility. Individual life seems cut-rate, even give-away, with the
loss of fixed standards and of an enduring goal. Personal exist-
ence in the 1950's means the malnourished soul, the diseased
moral life, and dissipated sense of worth. 1

 

1Carl Henry, Christian Personal Ethics (Grand Rapids: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1957), pp. 13-14.

 

”IL

rm 'j'

w_,

Lau‘,”..‘.o.

if
““5

I

l

 

yr

“ V . .. u. I
VLL-Tc'l‘ Ln; '1 L :Lt'L' LL H LI I’ LI.. ‘1. {’5 'LI‘ a‘C’a?£, "

.‘j _
'. ‘8.
I

   
   
  
  
  
  
   
    
    
  
   
   
 

L L I LL L .I :L 5.033 LJUII'J :nna
L ' . .L " LtJLh‘A ‘;;‘:|I‘ '1‘

o n $

. ' L: ' L L’.‘L‘,'ttu.r.r:L/.:L.lo
L L LL fun-ii at L LCD-t

F' ‘ .
\' IuMILILH ‘ 1'. if‘fi. ‘\ -'
L L L L ‘ L I W‘ ILL“; iv :2 ' '

L . . 'L -. . :L' .I‘ I..r. “p.331
v L L . L . . Ilium-Ii 'wgc'p’
.. L . L I ‘ so} Wu:
,. -LILL II LL55 lbhiiLfi‘é‘f
’ I '. :I L ' 'L' 51 Olln
L . ‘ L . ; L 7.‘ Ist mi
L L L L .'LL INA . -
. L :L' Inna:
L L ' I v Hum; it."
. "IL
.L . L I~ ,. .J'. nf) O _.
L I. L In. vi“ ._
L L L L L LL L . ' .IIIiSD'I.1-,
L ' ~ .I :(KJ'O ‘3 .V._
L L L .' Irzltrrnéoo' -,-.I I
L : ‘ HILL '1' twin“

L L LL 1 4 -..‘L".:. an,

L . L _ . rtrlr. it (11: . .ft‘

L . ' 4,;
“ L L T ' In: .‘I (J 1;
L L ':L . ”LI ”i'i'xin '11!-
L L L . I'I I L . its ed

L L r I ' L; L ~ I I) rumba ..'
.‘L L . L .L L L L 'L 5:.HI Irijoab‘

V ‘ ‘ H. t

LL. ' ..L L 4.. _; LI. 'L .5 ’I :L’I ‘- ."L Ii .'{jbi’boqt
L L L‘ ‘ .I LLLIL L » I My, 5.11:3 mi aiafl‘
; L , . ”L'Ii'rrr' Hicm :.
," ~'L .L7 L- .'L ,LL": ~31r .' as; :5le I-fllJlIiVibr-

'; . 'I L'LI- L ‘ L: 7» infusia a“ Ii

3 . _ , . . "I |
' .:Izzn '. Lr L Lr-. e;'1.'.rI'Lrs.:.1[I has}:
I

 

tat» .751 'L t' :Lnluzzi'de’.-'
L ——.—a-—L

:ahiqafl b12525) =' .5:
-’r. 1; .:‘I- I .cr ,(‘IE‘RI ..OD‘
' "tn' .
.'l

 

460

The field of communication, or any single aspect of it, is too
extensive to cover adequately in a single chapter. Therefore, the
present survey will be limited to tracing some of the indications of
communication trends in (1) recent political demagoguery in America
and Germany, (2) some outstanding features of current advertising
through mass media, and (3) the characteristics of modern literature.

In the second section of this chapter the apparent causes for the
decline in ethics will be indicated in order that some solution for this
collapse of values might be proposed.

With Special emphasis we would postulate that the indications
of unethical procedures in communication are not significant for their
revelation that a minority of individuals lack moral standards. This
has ever been the case, and merely to point it out afresh would be
labor lost. The important fact is that the increasing success of such
communicators suggests, not the low mentality of the masses, but
their willingness to reSpond to unethical stimuli. In the words of an
old Book: ”An appalling and horrible thing has happened in the land:
the pr0phets pr0phesy falsely, and the priests rule at their direction;

my peeple love to have it so. . . . "1

 

Until World War I such an assumption regarding the ethical
deterioration of the race would have been blasPhemy, for the essential
goodness of man had been taken for granted by many of the intelli-
gentsia since the days of Rousseau}. Created by humanistic Greece,
and propagated by Rome, the concept was revived during the Enlighten-
ment which taught that men would act rightly if given the opportunity to
know the right. On this premise was built the general belief in the
law of Progress which characterized the last half of the nineteenth

century and the beginning of the twentieth. World Wars I and II,

 

lJer. 5:30, 31. RSV

 

 

461

however, have practically destroyed the once prevalent view. Thus

we would repeat that the evidence concerning the regrettable practices
of many communicators indicates that a large number among the
masses are willing to respond to unethical motivation. We would sug-
gest that this number is much larger than in any preceding century.
David Reisman, in his portrayal of "the changing American character, ”

in The Lonely Crowd has pointed out the large scale development of

 

the "outer-directed" man who readily conforms to external pressures
and motivation because he lacks definite standards of his own. This
trend to conformity has given serious concern to many sociologists of
our day. On reflection it becomes apparent that the willingness to
conform is far from being a healthy sign. The ensuing description of
communication trends, therefore, is meant to stress, not merely the
nature of the practices themselves and their perpetrators, but the
moral weakness of the increasingly large number who choose to re-
Spond to unethical stimuli. This tragic situation indicates a breakdown

in moral education which demands a remedy.

Political Demagoguery in U. S. A. and Germany

 

During the great depression of the thirties, America was
afflicted with a rash of demagogues. These pOpular orators were well
aware that empty stomachs made men increasingly aware of the limi-
tations of their ethical standards and consequently vulnerable to the
verbal bribes of politicians. The fact that demagogues may not have
been as numerous since the thirties does not indicate that human
nature has changed, but only that not as many stomachs are now empty,
and that therefore fewer individuals are susceptible to the former
oratorical appeals. Briefly we would trace the careers of a few

memorable demagogues, reminding ourselves that these men had

 

   
  
 
  
  
 
    
   
  

= » > g ‘ ‘I‘uL YUJI'i'J -1
L' .‘.'b ml: .:‘.HH iii/j.

. n I “
I; .L '1 (I 'i"l‘.i-’ L110” “~,
I

L L. r .
,L L L , :L
L c L L'AJ'

x L ;L«I’L:..u naor.
\ A<- ‘

LL . L L‘ -H L' LJLBLO. -. 6L
I

. . .' lyyguxbgs '

L .L L L: L wens, artful:
' _ “)
L . w I. .. 1r riizn'x 5,14%.”
L ~ ‘ H: ' JP; 4 :L.
was;
L, " L v "LI 'LUII‘BO L, :34"
L ~ ;I. Ii“ hilt-q 1.3g

; LLLII‘LJ .L1 L {5.} :LIJ‘I’L’. a .

:o

' '. Lil”; {11:0 Jud .b , .

.-
I L.
L;
,.
‘5 r
o. '

462

success in our own generation in the most "enlightened" nation on
earth. It will be noticed particularly that the economic bribe
was one of the most appropriate tools in the propagandist kit of the
following figures.

A novel by a well-known Washington political reporter pointed
the way for would-be dictators via demagoguery. In this work a United
States Senator is pictured as saying:

Never make a Speech without referring to sweat-toiling masses.
Do not, under any circumstances, allow yourself to overdress

. . . but do not underestimate the value of a plug hat and a
frock coat on occasions. Be dignified, but not too dignified.

Be familiar, but not too familiar. Gauge your public carefully,
and be all things to all men. . . . Never take a drink with a
clergyman, but never fail to buy one for a ward boss. . . .
Truth-telling in politics is the mark of the inexperienced poli-
tician, but be careful to lie skilfully, and always remember how
you lied. . . . As you are a Democrat, you may go as far as
you like with Thomas Jefferson. Also, uphold the Constitution,
assail the Standard Oil Company savagely, lambast the oct0pi
for hours and hours, and assault the Money Devil and Wall
Street. . . . Always refer to the 1adies--God bless 'em--and
throw in a few flowery sentences about the children who are the
future guardians of the Republic. Again, the pe0p1e, the dear
common people, are the most fruitful topic in the world for
political eloquence. . . . Unceasing assaults on the citadels of
privilege and plutocracy as maintained by the Republican Party,
and long interpretation of the Democratic platform, with some
kind words about the Fathers and the dear Constitution, will
give you ample material. 1

This volume became the political primer of Huey P. Long and we know
not how many others of the stump trail.

Among those who diligently pursued the counsel of the fictitious
Senator was Theodore Gilmore Bilbo, self— styled as ”The Man. "

In a career of almost half a century, Bilbo was to make one
"combback" after the other, despite a short sentence served

 

lReinhold H. Luthin, American Demagogues: Twentieth Century,
p. 15, citing Samuel G. Blythe's The Fakers.

 

 

    
   
 
     
     
   
   
   
 
   
  
  

I ‘CC 31m")!

“".

V,» 5 -..: ad 11.“
all.” wwu' J (IF‘MB'D‘

).

. :‘urpi’l 2‘ r

c yd .rtvo'

c , l - V. w n no!

..A., 1‘41”.

X3 _ ;. g 7 Q 'thl! '
_ .- -1 - 3'ng '
. ‘ \' ' .'- "’ ‘30“ n 1:1:
_ , _ i 31.-'0' >. . .fl “ '.
;,.(W duo, ‘-
3' , \liixvzu'ifl I“?
. - .'L'. ed b -‘.
r , , .L.n‘v(71»5 v‘n‘
L‘J-fllhli'uuf l
.. 1.,1‘l‘i3 . {,x,
.. K . .' Lil 1’0"r '
..- i c-11tm' .'
i . Ln: fir-.3." y
. » awe-:1 'x
— ~ ' \' . . . .3551'.
r' x r ‘ . ti n Iii V'OS‘". 0‘9
- a $1,133 5,? ,:_,‘.‘,‘F.&
~ .~ “or non:
. .. . w 2715:2131
- r _ , r \ ' :r '1»: 5391”
‘ ' ’ c .;:2 j £116.!
" ~ ~' »V-~ "'-""1”':(~w' .
c. .:‘".EYLC ”CY”. E

I

- . .~ ; ' ;,': 4' - ;-:‘.L',:,d 9

- L x . a - . 'r x ‘zata’l
_ r _ c c , - u. (“fr "313 ,,5
T o
.r ~\; g : V ‘ ‘ I, - {I .lILIJ: .H. ha a L- .
,, , ... ... ;..
. ';.r :. . kmyfl‘ 1:)“ i:- ‘4

 

463

in jail and numerous charges of graft and broken promises.
Although "sedate” citizens winced at being represented in high
public offices by The Man, enough Mississippi supporters
always rallied to afflict the state with what the critics diagnosed
as the "Bilbonic Plague. "1

While politics beckoned to Bilbo as early as 1901, we are interested
in his prOpaganda appeals of the thirties. After losing a race for
Congress and securing the job of "Paste-master General" (manager of
a newsPaper clipping department) of Roosevelt's administration, Bilbo
was quiet for a short period. Then such criticism as the above appel-
lation stirred him to run against Senator Hubert Stephens in the 1934
Democratic primary. The following quotation reveals the typical
economic appeal.

At a monster barbecue, Bilbo presented a twenty-seven point
program--something for everybody except the "interests. "

The points included a “share-the-wealth” promise of cheaper
money for farmers, federal aid to schools, immediate payment
of the bonus to World War I veterans, pensions for oldsters,
higher wages and shorter hours and unemployment insurance for
workers, more federal funds for the destitute, federal funds for
highway construction, federal funds for the blind, and a "square
deal" for rural letter-carriers.7‘

The reality beneath this political front is indicated by his Dream House
at Juniper Grove. It contained twenty—seven rooms with five tiled
bathrooms.

In 1938 he announced a plan which would solve the unemployment
problem. The prOposal was to ship 12, 000, 000 Negroes to Africa,
and establish a Greater Liberia. ‘

"Alfalfa" Bill Murray was another of the same tradition. He also

saw in the days of gold paucity his golden opportunity.

 

lIbid., p. 44.
21bid., p. 63.

 

   

As“ ._
‘i

4.

1.: ‘<1'-.

,"“..:." . -j_
r;,;

. 1- ’5‘!"

 

km?

  
     
   
 

; :4 £35)ij

f ' 5335(105"
'

:‘.,( rj ...v

-;,c,(1r. Q

(r' 8_
—— -- r .53.; 8°} 'A
“,;/l:i(.'q a”:
‘ 2 It; ‘(a-ru f4
rug-0' .9113 ' '
‘a' ’
72."..8 'ILT'
.' “€21.63 ‘1'

\

.’ f ’2 Y1?” 0‘ ’ "

Iii-51 "1»; .».‘:-
, " 'I " -
1"}; ’10 6'2 -.. (‘5'?

464

. . . in a year when farmers were plagued by mortgages,
droughts, cr0p surpluses, and falling prices, when the bottom
had dropped out of the oil market prices, and when the lead
and zinc mines of the northeastern region had shut down, many
Oklahomans looked up to "Alfalfa Bill” as the pr0phet of better
times. 1

He dressed as though hard-hit himself by the depression tragedy.
Hand-me—down trousers which were unpressed, a soiled cotton shirt,
and socks from a ten-cent-store, stamped him as "one of the people. "

No one could deny that Murray was generous. During his first
year in office there were over one thousand employees added to the
state payroll and payroll expenses soared $50, 000 a month. Yes, all
his friends knew that “Alfalfa Bill" was generous. And the prisoners
found him "kind. " Did he not grant nearly six hundred pardons that
first twelve months ? Also indicative of his economic appeal was his
presidential slogan: "Bread, Butter, Bacon, and Beans. " Like every
demagogue he employed name-calling devices meant to stimulate the
prejudices of his hearers. Wall Street became "That vicious gambling
den that controls all our loans. " A Special round of Speeches was
delivered to the distressed agricultural state of North Dakota in the
endeavor to win the presidential primary there. For the wealthy classes,
choice invective was reserVed--"backbiters, " ”varmints, " ”polecats, "
"highbinders, " and ”craven wolves of plutocracy” were among his
favorites. After a period in retirement ”Alfalfa Bill” came forth as
an organizer of an association whose chief objective was tax equality.
His former success was not to be retrieved and by 1939 once more in

retirement he was writing The Finished Scholar, a volume advising

 

procedure in manners, mathematics, punctuation, grammar, and
public Speaking. In the forties he was to enter the political arena once

more, but without his. old glory.

 

11pm., p. 111.

 

.1; “t ‘1 | HILL; "é

     
    
 
   
  
  
   
  
  
  
  

lsm ray 8 I}.

,!:?1 .

L.‘ 1' eqtfo'i‘ r
. . a; r‘rxicltf"_§
f .
. a 4 .. l

1".
.n . oarbzfifw

- - .'1; 2.110 ' -

c ’. z'l; suillv‘

i ‘1 in . _i'l 1v]

if
c. 1.); ch ..

.; ., ":lrl }( pg .
. H L
i . it 17110-9, r..-
c ';‘.;~i :(1’03“A-
.. -E; hill (23: .

v ut~ evijoav.

;: 1.: 2531/; ‘

' .1. I'i' in 23’

L

LELUDUQI

- L1,. ;;.[ '8' ,- 1'.

J’ Till Juerr' '

‘. ,._. -
. ., ,
- o
r"!

465

A demagogue of similar proportions was Eugene Talmadge,
"The Wild Man" of Sugar Creek, Georgia.

In the fury unleashed by the agrarian agitation in Georgia
during the mid-1920's, a humorless man with an unruly fore-
lock of jet black hair, who wore red galluses and ”Harold
Lloyd” Spectacles, leaped from the obscurity of a Telfair
County law office to state and national prominence.

From 1926 to 1946 Eugene Talmadge took to the hust-
ings in every state Democratic primary in election in Georgia.
Adopting a rural "Cracker" accent and snapping his gaudy
suSpenders for emphasis as he poured forth invective on his
foes, the so-called "Wild Man of Sugar Creek" exploited the
farmer's fears and prejudices. 1

In the twenties, cotton had sunk as low as eight cents a pound.
Peaches and watermelons hardly paid for their freight expenses to
market. Talmadge's campaign stationery was stamped with the
caption:

A. REAL DIRT FARMER
Talmadge Against the Machine
Eugene Talmadge
Candidate for
Commissioner of Agriculture.

Thus he indicated the pattern of his program for two decades.
AS governor in the thirties he had both henhouse and barn erected in
the Executive Mansion grounds and declared loudly that the bellowing
of livestock and the cackling of poultry were essential to lull him to
sleep at nights. One of his first executive acts was drastically to
reduce the price of automobile tags. By 1934 he felt strong enough
to contest FDR for leadership of the nation. He opposed the President
on the issues of the allotment of federal relief funds, N. R.A. , and
. farm policy.
Of particular interest is Luthin's comment regarding the oral

approach of Talmadge.

 

llbid” p. 182.

_’. -4..-”-
- . Add“ .
'. .
,
I
A

        
      
   

.‘ N
) l .
i . ‘1 . ’
x 4‘ l
w.
. i' .'6 7 ~ \
-_t l .k
‘ .' '. ' o
. ‘ ‘\
I J 0
'l“! . ' ‘
1"
."a'
1» ~
I. ,
,. L .
‘l
I- A
2
,.
.,, L
/ PK
\ ' ‘
A r“ 1 L .
; “ .'.;'

; ’ J... (I'.

a an «7.03111; 10 0¢_-

  
 
  
   
   
  
  
 
  
   
   
  
 
   
  

'r. ta. "11 LU. .5;

.;, ' 313.0 ttv "If

ULIJL um v1 ..."-
,..'(‘.‘ ('r-w i‘HOIfij
1M :fbt .U-
4.3'. mi: aqa N
it! 1:! 17".)
~ ‘ 5 mot?"
'- ‘-«--"— ‘ T's/s a; ‘
)
F. ”mu . .
5. cwfrbd'g'.‘ ,
‘ , m2»: sdi 1‘-
» Azs'ia'u; '

,.Lwl‘

I
. r.
v., , :Lliflzbwlav-

. . 1.. unoilfuu bag

- , :‘cw smis'l';
.I. '
‘:\,_
1‘. L, ' ”in"
g .. r .17) I4"
; ,Jt'nihliim

.fA .
. "17'
.L‘ s;,:r.j:r13 add at '.

snO

": win 1!

rjli':;'tb"EI.‘JI 1'01", It *-

3 urjrus orfl“ 7);;
'LJ’iJIH'iu
.581).

466

When looking for the farm vote, Gene aped the Cracker Speech

of rural Georgia, concealing his college training beneath un-
polished locutions as he assailed "frills" in government, and
"nigger-lovin' furriners. " He defined his enemy: "Anyone who
attempts to impose ideas that are contrary to the established
traditions of Georgia is a 'furriner‘. ” In addressing city
audiences Talmadge's grammar and diction were vastly improved,
his ranting modified. 1

He Specialized in old-fashioned country political rallies which
were often a cross between an all-out barbecue and a carnival with
vaudeville. Musical performers travelled with him to please the in-
habitants of Sparsely populated counties.

Like Theodore Bilbo, Talmadge endeavored to mold the state's
educational system according to his personal biases,- but this inter-
ference led him to political catastrophe. Once he asked a reporter.
"Do you think I'm a damned fool?" The answer was: “Well, Governor,
some think you're a damned fool, some think you're a dictator, some
think you're a demagogue, and some think you're just as mean as hell. "

The year 1932 witnessed "The Louisiana Kingfish" Huey P. Long
as a member of the United States Senate. His famous Slogan "Every
Man a King but no Man wears a Crown" had been borrowed from a
Speech of William Jennings Bryan in 1900, and it had powerful economic
overtones. By 1935, "Share—Our—Wealth" clubs were Springing up
throughout the South, and in parts of the North. That year, Long sang
over a radio station in New Orleans his presidential campaign song.

Why sleep or slumber, America?
Land of brave and true;

With castles, clothing, and food for all,
All belongs to you.

(Chorus)
Ev'ry man a king; ev'ry man a king;

 

11bid. , p. 197.

 

l"

 

r\ g
n . t I L
(
x r L
n. C . L
. _
: .. o c K
L _
V .
L L
c
ck
_
L .
L
a

- f

JIM

‘ .

 

467

For you can be a millionaire.
But there's something belonging to others,
There's enough for all pe0ple to Share.
When its sunny June or December too,
Or in the Winter time or Spring,
There'll be peace without end,
Every neighbor a friend,
With ev'ry man a king.

When Huey Long was assassinated, another demagogue rose to
praise him. This was Father Coughlin, who referred to Long's

"1 Here was

death as "the most regrettable thing in modern history.
a demagogue who also saw in the economic plight of the nation an
opportunity for wielding power over the multitudes via oratory.
Coughlin called not only for "a living annual wage” but also for
”Nationalization of banking and currency and of national resources. ..2
Coughlin at first endorsed the program of Roosevelt but later became
one of his bitterest critics. Like the demagogues of Dixie, he also
used race-hatred for motivation, as well as promises of plenty via
his financial schemes.3 The radio-priest demonstrated that it was not
only the less fortunate Southerners who were susceptible to high
powered, prejudice-centered propaganda. So powerful did Coughlin
become that Roosevelt selected the former Head of the National
Recovery Administration, General Hugh Johnson, to assail him over
the radio as a “Pied-Piper" and a deluder of the pe0p1e. The
"Louisiana Kingfish" was also castigated by Johnson at this time.
These are but a few of the figures conSpicuous in America's

recent demagogic tradition. It is obvious that each of these was an

apt scholar in the School of Prepaganda and possessed the prerequisite

 

lIbid. , p. 270.

2Frederick Lewis Allen, Since Yesterday: The Nineteen Thirties

 

in America (Toronto: Blue Ribbon Books, 1943), p. 189.

 

3Father Coughlin was a pronounced anti-semitist.

’ Y.:.

‘.'.‘.
1
'.\
.- .‘ ,4
.’I n

     
   
 
  
  
   
   
  
  
  
   
  
  
  
  

;_~, ‘J , MN 1( '7‘ .
‘ \ 1'92! .~ 5
‘ I
' .. , . 'J‘ ;. lie-{IT "‘>‘
1 - _ _ _ - r ' ; rru 311': xi, -
,‘ . l - L . x .. x a 10 ,I a
,. Q
l . - - 23114:!1‘ ? ‘

r-n

1. ll _ , r .c ( 17".”.
n L Ufll'” "'
- , -
.I

 

53ml [:8 I

b

,m‘Jg”

. .r
I !»Ug(;, ; -’
, 1W3.

‘ iJinfl K

- - - , 'r 9113”

. 1 ($153315 ;

L c - ,_ all 34: n 7 .

w - .'V' ..
. , N . V ;. c :ILJ'JIII' 8w_ 7,,

,. 4 ‘ ‘ _L LLJ-Ld‘an :3: - .

     
  

-5

n . , . ~ ' c a. -( (.:le lsia'
. C

“£15 a; -

 

' ‘ . _.r mzx'i 9.80;: 11?: .
- ‘ ., ‘ ".4
. c c. t -s:‘ H meat! 1 -
‘ 4._.
n I
-- , . . _ . ;; c - - L‘ba-flnfi 1511?}
u'J‘ ‘ ' V “
Jr 'A . , _ _ , >
, ‘ , L _ , -, ‘ramuth. .-‘

42..-...
,wo- gpr‘

, , . c -- sf" 58.61,,

  

~‘v~

,_ , '1; '
-. - . - _ (19113,;an z. .5

_r

_ 'fir'
_ - . .7 .. n ma! 515, '4... _-

,, _ ,( , . , 95;. “mm, -
'L' [“3“ ‘ '4 ‘~ ’ ' r ilrlguog

- )4.

2%”?

K..- . 4‘ t

468

of a character unhampered by ethical ”Shackles. ” Across the waters,
similar patterns (though more sober in presentation) had begun to be

manifested in the late twenties among a smarting, defeated race.

Nazi Demagoguery

 

In Germany not only finances but national pride had been rendered
tenuous and shaky as a result of the unsuccessful war of 1914-18. The
man for the hour was a demagogue even more able than his American
parallels. What did he have to say concerning the science of propaganda

in his own confession of faith, Mein Kampf? The following statements

 

indicate the core of his philosophy in this regard.

PrOpaganda's task is, for instance, not to evaluate the
various rights, but far more to stress exclusively the one that
is to be represented by it. It has not to search into truth as
far as this is favorable to others, in order to present it then to
the masses with doctrinary honesty, but it has rather to serve
its own truth uninterruptedly. 1

The pe0p1e, in an overwhelming majority, are so feminine
in their nature and attitude that their activities and thoughts are
motivated less by sober consideration than by feeling and senti-
ment.

This sentiment, however, is not complicated but very
simple and complete. There are not many differentiations, but
rather a positive or a negative; love or hate, right or wrong,
truth or lie; but never half this and half that, or partially, etc. 2

All propaganda has to be popular and has to adapt its
spiritual level to the perception of the least intelligent of those
towards whom it intends to direct itself. Therefore its Spiritual
level has to be screwed the lower, the greater the mass of pe0ple
which one wants to attract. But if the problem involved, like the
propaganda for carrying on a war, is to include an entire people.

 

1Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf (New York: Reynal and Hitchcock,
1939). p. 236.

2Ibid., p. 237.

 

 

 

  
    
 

 

-—" v v—
- V
a»
J
.
_ - . ill-"l
.
k , 1 .
-1 .1 J.“
O u N I
~ LTI:J(>‘ - :;
.,-;.
A.
c i . "'-,r1a‘91
\ .

« . _‘- ."htltt'nzfl

a . - 1'f(lblfi.‘.
‘ ’V
o

. * j
.-

‘ ‘ ‘ . '3 ‘
c , - .w, 5.1,;ij- g...“ U

. ,0.

r . .. " :(r (45 -'€.
JrU an
,. . ._ €1,565!“ -'

.v'

,4
.
...

,_,‘ , ._;r;”.;) [pygr ,5)“,

-19-

-.-. 2.1. ’fJ’MN

.v 'eI- :; (IT .i

i . c f ‘ -1'1' 2; :19, ’l

. . ' . _‘ 1' :4} [353:5 ‘1 .

. 1;) ...

, : ...- aid'l” '
-. _x ; ‘. ; .-; " f'nso

,. . - . Lavini'ugg I,

c ;, In" fill 10' .
l_""

 

469

in its field of action, the caution in avoiding too high Spiritual
assumptions cannot be too great.

The more modest, then, its scientific ballast is, and
the more it exclusively considers the feelings of the masses,
the more striking will be its success. This, however, is the
best proof whether a particular piece of prOpaganda is right
or wrong, and not the successful satisfaction of a few scholars
or 'aesthetic' languishing monkeys. 1

At the party congress in Nuremberg in 1936 Hitler declared:
"Propaganda brought us into power, prOpaganda has since enabled us
to remain in power, and prOpaganda will give us the means of conquer-
ing the world. "2 Typical of his instructions for the conducting of
mass meetings are the following:

(1) When musicians or a gramophone or radiogram are available,
distract the audience as they come into the meeting, eSpecially
by playing rousing popular airs.

(2) Maintain the excitement and the dynamism of the audience at
an increasing pitch up to the end of the meeting.

(3) From time to time, start an argument between the Speaker or
another person and the crowd in the hall, throwing out questions
and instigating collective replies--"Yes§', ”No", etc. A mass
affirmation of this sort acts on the crowd like an electric shock
and stimulates its ardour.

(4) Have songs before and after the Speeches. Songs to be sung
always standing, never seated. '

(5) Speeches must never exceed thirty minutes.

(6) Play out the audience at the end with a pOpular fighting song.
(7) If possible, present an amusing sketch, or a chorus sung or
spoken, or have appropriate verses declaimed.

(8) A symbolic tableau, orilluminated placard, dynamic and
cheerful, or sarcastic, accompanied by music, may be useful
as light relief.

(9) Incite the audience to make the revolutionary gesture from
time to time: shout "Freedom'. ", with the clenched fist raised.
(10) Decorate the hall with cloths bearing slogans and symbols,

 

11b__i__d., p. 232.

2Serge Chakotin, The Rape of the Masses (London: Butler and
Tanner Ltd., 1940), p. 174.

 

 

J

- .
.:lui

has.

I;

£1310

r

 

'r-f

‘J

     

 

470

with flags, greenery, etc.; have in the hall a group of young
militants as stewards, in uniform and wearing arm-bands with
the emblem. 1

Undoubtedly Adolf Hitler was a master of mob psychology, and
the preceding indicates the careful attention he gave to insignia, bands,
uniforms, symbols, bunting, expectant waiting periods, compact
seating, etc. It was his objective to heighten emotional processes and
to lower rational processes. Prejudices and frustrations, needs and
fears, were played upon by this master demagogue. In number his .
main ideas were few, and these were aimed at a low level of intelligence.
His procedure was entirely Machiavellian.

In summary it can be said that Hitler's propaganda was character-
ized by three elements:

. . . the ignoring of moral considerations, the appeal to the
emotions of the masses by the use of the ”first" (combative)
instinct as basis, and the employment of rational methods for
the formation of conditioned reflexes inducing conformity in
the masses. 2

In both American and German demagoguery it is easy to perceive
the employment of the typical propaganda techniques which have been
often enumerated as follows--Band»Wagon, Card-Stacking, Glittering
Generality, Name-Calling, Plain-Folks, Testimonial, Transfer.3

The impressive feature of the lives of the foregoing demagogues
is that the masses enthusiastically elevated them to power. This was
not merely because skillful propaganda Short-circuited rational
processes in listeners. It was also because the appeals to greed and

selfishness found reSponseS in minds and hearts without high ethical

standards .

 

‘Ibid., pp. 171-172.
z1pm., p. 183.

3Clyde R. Miller, Propaganda Analysis, Institute for PrOpaganda
Analysis, Vol. 1, No. 2 (November, 1937), pp. 1-3.

 

A a

—',«4o-*-H :1.“ .

." >-
\
V
\.
‘.

 

.'{U'UI UL! _i 1;
'1‘). :1. r1
.
l ; ‘
l l .

   
  
    
 
 
   

i"':' ".;i( d'

‘\ '.('. 11‘. r 3] .-

;; ..-- '.,( 'xllfO J

\ . r » b“(1‘~l(‘|9‘4

- (
. Li straw ‘
f _.
f - L nr-n.’ 92 u,"-
Ihl'
; . ., 'ij; t(-_-H,;m ‘ '1) .
u |
., _ x
» Orwels MW},
2'1- ' 'f'ni orb .:'
9!". it: anal "
! 1.7.2111 9.5;] i

7' 1." Ltjjg

s
.2533: .,
r'mi-.zpmaa

o,
7.
,.

._ I‘L‘. Lwi Ca ‘Iia 3512i

.Azr'.'..L‘.,U[£j_rx€-’ 38a . ._‘,_ .,
"1‘ 1'

Jul jg. a a

if ( ° t.
4.44.1.- as;
NWH) s ..

4:
L, ;
- ‘., ,
'l ' Of

471

Use of the Mass Media

 

PrOpaganda is Spread not only by the mass meeting. It is not
even chiefly Spread this way. Modern communication techniques
multiply the Spread of ideas in a way hitherto unknown. For example,
a Single Speaker today, through the agencies of television, radio,
and neWSpaper can reach more people in a Single day than a whole
corps of nineteenth century orators could have reached in a generation.

The mass media inevitably became the instrument of politics,
with resultant good and ill. During the last fifteen years commercial
public relations experts have done much to mold public political
Opinion on a nation wide scale.

For the public relations man the press and the other
media are not only distributors of information but instruments
of social control, and the media have for various reasons been
forced to accept this estimate of themselves. 1

It helps us to realise something of the sc0pe of the mass media to
consider the following list of the present channels for public communi-
cation in America.

1, 800 daily neWSpapers

10, 000 weekly neWSpapers
7, 600 magazines
2, 000 trade journals
7, 635 periodicals geared to race groups

100, 000, 000 radio sets
12, 000, 000 TV sets

15, 000 motion-picture houses

6, 000 house organs. 2

According to Fortune "nearly half the content of the nation's better

 

1Thomas R. Nilsen, "Free Speech, Persuasion, and the Demo-
cratic Process, " Quarterly Journal of Speech, XLIV (October, 1958)
p. 2390 ‘

ZVance Packard, The Hidden Persuaders (New York: Pocket
Books, Inc., 1959), p. 187.

 

 

g

, \ ‘ .:1217)(5,§. 7;

!.(*

q D00 '3!"

    
 
   
  
  

‘J
.

'i
,.

.. 1;'£(:.l

I.
: (ltd: 5d”; “1 ‘l'

in omr..'

- ' _ (1:5,: 3"“
, -. (M; ,01‘ A

. ‘1 .006;

2 I} {100

izcr r1863

,f" , _I L'“ 00") .

- . . -v' $117011”
‘ -L , - Us”: )1 a’
, - I ‘. .eut' "

l- ‘

‘
And-.5

O

1’.

 

472

newsPapers comes from publicity releases. "1 As Thomas R. Nilsen
remarks "Publicity releases, we may remind ourselves, are not
random revelations of information but statements carefully chosen
for the effect they will have. "2

What is there that is contrary to high ethical values in the public
relations use of the mass media? The answer includes many elements,
but the chief contravention of moral rights is the calculated endeavor
to shortcut the rational processes of listeners and readers. Democracy
is founded on belief in the dignity of the individual human being. It
assumes that mankind is superior to the brute creation, that he is not
ruled by instinct, and that he has the capacity to make conscious
rational choice. These assumptions have been established as correct
by the sciences. Contrary to popular opinion, Freud's work did not
demonstrate that man was entirely dominated by subconscious desire.
Rather, Freud endeavored to prove that man is capable of bringing to
the surface of his knowledge the facts regarding his subconscious
conflicts and, through his awareness of such, be enabled to resolve
and govern his personal behavior. Neither the extreme Freudians,
who would attribute all man's behavior to sex, or the extreme dialectical
materialists who shift the biological area of control from the sex glands
to the stomach, have adequate scientific support for their hypotheses.
While man is influenced strongly by his emotions and his physiological
drives, he is capable of making decisions which are largely determined
by rational grounds.

This is the basis of the democratic view of the sacredness of the
individual and his right to choose. ”Democracy rejects the premise

that the 'pe0ple is a beast, ' that the individual is an instinctual creature

 

lNilsen, p. 239.
21pm., p. 239.

     
  
   
 
    
    
     
  
 
 

_ ._ - "' .' .J. 1.0“)“,

1:117

-..”..-
l
I
f
(
..
I

.m'raq‘q
. .

..A. 11.11219 41"-

-4“—
If
(

”Vt. VP.
. a
.

V

'_

 

,4, Jul x;(' b "
..o
. mu
,'1 Men! -
. .;' inda.
l
. a: )noi' '-

5'.

n .: L151 1;
.1 i...“
L" ...; 1;”1’151‘3'va
.3 Q

- ' in $1.: ”eff

. .- m1 m-
- [UV 141335 b

. .:" ..i ML? ad's ‘
L ' . , ; ff'r: .1105 ..-,
" . «bulb—xi ai
_,, chlrmgizs a};
_HhI-Jx‘l'x‘afl ‘ ,
' s‘ .
'. _. ?: H.‘1Cl‘;.|"'.‘
- . .- . . Jigi'x ant

. , j _ . -‘ I ,- “,,",'.L‘I: 5 3i 0‘:—
~ .. . Q.

.9:

 

473

who can only be moved by the manipulation of his emotions and
reflexes.'"1 On these grounds, all persuasive endeavors which
attempt to short-circuit the decision-making process by means of
eclipsing the rational by emotional appeal are unethical. Emotion's
place is to reinforce reason, not to eclipse it.

Franklyn Haiman Speaks Similarly in his discussion of modern
advertising and propaganda methods:

. . . They attempt to make him buy, vote, or believe in a
certain way by short-circuiting his conscious thought processes
and planting suggestions or exerting pressures on the periphery
of his consciousness which are intended to produce automatic,
nonreflective behavior. The methods are similar to those of
Pavlov's famous conditioned-reflex experiments with dogs.
Ring a bell and the dog salivates. No thought processes inter-
vene here. Non-critical reflex action--this is the goal of the
hidden persuader. 2

When we remember that most pe0ple are subjected to the influence
of newsPapers and similar channels of advertising and prOpaganda for
more years than they attend school and college, the magnitude of the
problem will be sensed. Furthermore, recent studies Show that "most
Americans now Spend between three and six hours a day, on the average
with mass communication. This probably compares with not much more
than an hour fifty years ago, and considerably less one hundred years
ago. "3

Another unethical aSpect of prOpaganda as employed by demagogues
and advertisers is the deliberate attempt to avoid alternative or oompet-

ing ideas. The basis of democracy is free discussion, and it is

 

1Franklyn S. Haiman, "Democratic Ethics and the Hidden Per-
suaders, " Quarterly Journal of Speech, XLIV (December, "1958), pp.
385-392.

zlbid. ,

 

 

3Wi1bur Schramm, ReSponsibility in Mass Communication
(New York: Harper and Brothers, 1957), p. 25.

 

.‘ioa '-

‘Q‘fi' ‘6
r U

’ u
‘

 

     
   
   
    
   
   
 
 
  
  
 

L ./ _'o I; "I 3“
1,).1‘) ‘3
‘ r

, 2 .1
_ 1.1 ' ‘1' ~J'IOM', ‘1',
. 2 k‘
». ‘5 c $41.32 a

_ _ ,J'
t , _ 'i...f‘.10'ln "’

l"!”! :5
h'

7‘. _ , 1 ll.“ 8
{1 I"? 5 .
- J .._. -- x’1j83._,-"
‘3'.ch .1?-

L 1 t ) ehfl_‘._
- 4.1m; Ila! -‘,

.. H 'VO‘I‘V- AT,

'Sn' .5 38'; L.
- .L 2.5:[18 ' a

.. (3.

l “of“. ' .0:

. .o L'; {W ubv‘?

;'- ('1, 81qu .

:3 Luz: a‘r'

-. .Mocflliw“

, _ ‘_ .H "A ‘- (I!

i, .

n' 'tnwo

.- "..o
, r;{{1111'1-:4
...!
.'

' r 2:, l ‘V
_ 1."): an '11)! "

.‘

_ ,H'n Ln? .'3'

-.~~.;:t L {her . V V

. ; —; ,mrrlsa a '7

.L (."Lr _ ‘7 !‘ 125.1,”-

474

believed that if all ideas are equally canvassed, men will have the
Opportunity of selecting aright to the dictates of reason and morality
if they so desire. Modern prOpaganda, however, prohibits as far as
possible the thought that there may be another Side to the question
than that being presented.

. . . with the use of modern prOpaganda methods employing
the media of the press, radio and television, the process of
debate is circumscribed, relative to the number of pe0ple
involved, to a degree never before seen in our democratic
society . . . the problem takes on a new dimension when
millions of people can be delivered up to one Speaker on one
occasion. To the side with the most money to buy the most
favorable time goes the opportunity for the maximum satu-
ration with its ideas with the least possibility of competition.‘

A glaring example of this is the fact that in the 1956 election
none of the major public relations firms would undertake the cause of

the Democratic candidate.

AS one executive put it: ”you see how it is. If a big agency

took on the Democrat's account and the Democrats won, it would
simply enrage Republican clients and drive them away. On the
other hand, if it took them on and the Democrats lost, it wouldn't
look too good for its selling ability. " The public relations firms
whose primary source of accounts is business, particularly

”big business”, are not impartial about whose side they are on
in a political campaign. 2

The issues presented in propaganda, whether it be the propaganda
of the demagogue or that of the advertiser, are rarely the real ones.
False or side issues are selected because of their impact and motiva-

tional value. Vance Packard's The Hidden Persuaders is a startling

 

revelation of the unprincipled harnessing of depth psychology by adver-

tisers in luring Americans into the greatest buying Spree of all time.

 

1Nilsen, pp. 240-241.

2).W. H. Hale, "The Politicians Try Victory Through Air Power, "
Reporter, XV (September, 1956), p. 20.

 

 

. - .1 1 U1 J '. 191‘.
a , I j: v
_ L _ s .11.".., u
H 1» - van-{6.1"-
., .. ' ~‘w ([131W 1
‘o . a l; . 1113;!) o
- . ' .'- 211': o ..
V - 1 1.»
t - t c - V ,1”; V.‘

I- .. g . , , . V!” i f,"
- ' .. .'_’ I.“ HIIC- ‘-
o '. .. .‘ , 1 .uoka «

_ - ii. cffifi'fiQ

. ,- .‘ 1'31"” no ;.'

  
  
   
   
  
   

.' z. 'ni'z :' w

a _ ,., ~,( [.3111 5.;1‘9

‘ , _ sumac 1,,-
- . '.l s; _.i ,t-nndi .37“:
o . 2 2 §
.‘ ... _1, (08 0"7').
. '5'. tmi'xqg 3‘,"

‘ q », , , rabbit; .,‘
. . 1‘. . £5513“
y».
L; taut; (Jena? ,4.
l . ‘ ll
.2, ‘;.or-f..
' 1..l ' f F
1 - . . _ . ’ I .1 J J JQ ~
- a. o t' or. 3511881351.
, J.
— , - ' " 1”= 5:11:51," -
. . ,15.‘
L ~ L '1 £‘J‘I'IQITU « "1 .1
., _..hgv"
- -. s o“; 1 1::‘c1'll'1l'101ffl *1; ~
,r H.043
. r‘.’ - 1"” " MH‘” ,5
r ‘ l
.' . ,( Jf asthma

475

The author in his conclusion cites his own questionings regarding the
ethical nature of the advertising he has described. He says:

It is my feeling that a number of the practices and tech-
niques I've cited here very definitely raise questions of a
moral nature that should be faced by the persuaders and the
public. For example:

What is the morality of the practice of encouraging house-
wives to be nonrational and impulsive in buying the family food?

What is the morality of playing upon hidden weaknesses
and frailties--such as our anxieties, aggressive feelings, dread
of nonconformity, and infantile hang-overs--to sell products ?
Specifically, what are the ethics of businesses that shape cam-
paigns designed to thrive on these weaknesses they have
diagnosed?

What is the morality of manipulating small children even
before they reach the age where they are legally responsible
for their actions?

What is the morality of treating voters like customers,
and child customers seeking father images at that?

What is the morality of exploiting our deepest sexual
sensitivities and yearnings for commercial purposes?

What is the morality of developing in the public an attitude
of wastefulness toward national resources by encouraging the
“psychological obsolescence" of products already in use?

What is the morality of subordinating truth to cheerfulness
in keeping the citizen posted on the state of his nation?1

May it suffice to say that these words represent the feelings of others

besides Packard.

Characteristics of Modern Literature

 

Such a subject as suggested by this heading would require a
volume of ample prOportions to even begin to cover it adequately.
We hOpe here merely to suggest the conclusions of some able students

of literature which indicate the ethical impasse to which this branch of

 

lPackard, pp. 22 1 - 222.

 

. ‘
...r ..
. ..J
.. U
1 .u
U ...f
... .
, t. .
r.
a
.
L

b
a c
.I. . .
C
q
C
x
.
t.

.:'} (...) ob,'

ij'fcr.

c
v

3}— ~

L '.

1

\(fl
viiip ‘

oh.

'.’..1:

s

I

‘(c (33 0'10

x

,

.. 911(1‘

   

1
J:
. 1

4'.

5
‘0
a?

I 4
. I” . 'LDI ‘ r
. ... .....z. .
r a . ...)9, \a . . 1
LL. :4“ 5.91.: 5 5 ..
_ a _
.r. .I.! 9dr 3 pus . . .. a
tau/33.x. o. ..-.
Lairtir .. r a a. .1.
A . I pl I
.....w.....|.u. (.- . (.96....
r . . ... I . (.. .ul 4 , .J.
i .. . .i s a .1 I
u . . _. .J .... Iv In
a L It \.J (.. I .rL
I.’ .
~ ’4 f. v 1
C e c _ 3 f .q “..
. g . - ._
x . .. .. . .l
r U .N
a L
. .c .
a . 3 L .
_. c c ; L
t \ c
L . ~ L
_
c
\ L
_
~
L
a a
a
a
L
..
a
s.

 

“0...: A; an
a. . h .
L (for
f It ..4.
u 1".1:
...
_
.
.v

 

476

communication has come. Such scholars suggest that the dominant
conceptual myths of today's writers are (1) Voyage, (2) Hell,

(3) Isolation, and (4) Doubt. All of these emphases, for example, are
found in the following lines of Conrad Aiken;

We need a theme? then let that be our theme:
that we, poor grovellers between faith and doubt,
the sun and north star lost, and compass out,
the heart's weak engine all but stopped, the time
timeless in this chaos of our wills--

that we must ask a theme; something to think,
something to say, between dawn and dark,
something to hold to, something to love.’

This poem summarizes much of modern literature. It describes
moderns as "poor grovellers between faith and doubt, " and thousands
upon thousands of current works reveal that authors and readers fit
intothis category. When Aiken refers to ”the sun and north star lost,
and compass out" he indicates the prevailing loss of direction and
absolutes.

. . when the traditional premises regarding the radical sig-
nificance of things have collapsed and when, therefore, there
is no longer any robust common faith to orient the imaginative
faculties of men with respect to the ultimate mysteries of
existence--when, in other words, the basic presuppositions
of a culture have become just yawning question-marks, then the
literary artist is thrust upon a most desolate frontier indeed. 2

In the award of the 1951 Nobel Prize for literature to Lagerkvist

for his Barabbas we see a significant indication of the trend of the times.

 

This story dramatizes, in the person of the released brigand, the prob-
lem of doubt. Barabbas is haunted by Christianity. He watches the

death of Christ, and later mingles with the early Christians. From

 

1Conrad Aiken, Time in the Rock, cited by Nathan A. Scott Jr.,
p. 1.

2-Scott, pp. 3-4.

 

 

  
  
    
    
   
   
  

..‘I
.urtu 1: {Led ~‘-;_»
. ~.

‘ 1
- “(511th .‘m at} Av...

~ ‘L ." .a
‘_ v -_[ b
‘./\‘ ‘ 11:11 ’1 ““6
- - "..“. .7111)!“ 0

e; r. t ,1 .3 {xrirfif
‘ tr; y‘all ‘

‘ I
. I
- f
.LH; (.t‘xirnua, ..
~ - k
.'
e . .

J." .1" 0111‘; (16
c " 3111127110 9

~ I: _r .7 1p 1" 183w.“
4.1;. . .. , _
_. c -. n small 5': 4,.
r. r It» 7i minus
’ T {(121 10 1115'!

4.» 32:1. (.55.: ow 6f..-

 

"" " ‘I’ir‘ an,
Critic). ....

477

the disciples he learns the gosPel, but his mind and heart find no
rest. He confesses to a Roman governor that he wants to believe

but cannot. Lucien Maury, in his Preface to Barabbas, declares

 

that in this book is expressed "the riddle of Man and his destiny,
the contrasted aspects of his fundamental drama, and the cry of
humanity in its death throes, bequeathing its spirit to the night. . . .

Barabbas . . . embodies the emotional climate of our times. "1

 

Modern literature frequently stresses the fact that mankind is
adrift on a voyage to he knows not where. He is without compass,
and deSpite the pressure of the crowds he is dreadfully alone. In his
breast he carries hell, the torment of mingled aspirations and passions.
And the primary cause for these characteristics of the literary picture
is the loss of certainty regarding ethical values. Mankind is lost and
knows it is so.

. . . the language of imaginative literature is not the ethically
and spiritually neutral jargon of any science: it is, rather a
language which, if it is to do its pr0per work, needs to be
heavily weighted with the beliefs and sentiments and valuations
that are the deep source in the culture of its "hum and buzz of
implication" and that bind the people together with ties that
separate them from the people of other cultures. 2

”In the profoundest human sense, " said Kenneth Burke in one of
his early books, "one communicates in a weighted vocabulary in
which the weightings are shared by one's group as a whole. "
But it is just at this point that modern culture has represented
great privation. There is, in fact, little of anything at all of
profound significance that is widely shared by modern men.3

 

It may be inquired whether an absence of ethical emphasis need

be itself unethical. We would suggest that when the great mass of

 

1Par Lagerkvist, Barabbas (New York: Random House, 1951),
pp. viii-ix.

 

zScott, p. 5.
31bid., p. 6.

  
   
  
    
   
    
    
   

\'

c ‘ J l c I! ‘31“ t'fl’lflDI‘s
1.‘ .

_ c 1' t"15('1£)308‘

   

c , ...‘ .u ti ,‘(rmm ' x1310

e . _ .“ ....au'it .:-

    
 

' 4'

e ' 1.\.L1.' LJ'”

-v. . -t 1.19 «ituz'b (3:13,

'

I

_. Wm:

f 7.
.... .. I‘LZrlf)

T'A'~<-§

.., . . A.-.Iu—-' Ni- ...
A ~‘- .- '|

e ‘ 1 L t _ it u,l.".”‘,ill£1 {4m-
c ‘ , " 311:." 71151031? 4.

r . .7. ‘L '4 ,rluirl'w 4;
c , ,.- ; - ,- 1 L1: | Ljfii'jflw L‘ :_.:' A I

r '. ' o _. '. .. ant ': t 552 as“?! |
,- .e ;_ - ‘..;‘»'3 rowan"
- c . e c'; L a..- {151.1 muff, , .

y . .L
(r ' . .. in". 315' rumin,‘ _,
H .. A ‘ f i,-I' \‘II ,EICIDd‘ 'f' —
k " -_._' z ;' 4 mgr‘iwigiswbmil

‘r' i ,1..'; atoll: .noim'
. , . . l—v' ‘
' * ‘ ”..: 3f1.1;~51:‘£1£‘m"f'7 , ,

r
(
L

(W
V
as
‘3‘
“n
)1:
1h
:5:
C
L;
m

478

literature Spends its emphases on uncertainty and doubt, the inevit-
able effect must be the disintegration of the already feeble ethical
standards of many readers. To refuse to uphold morals is to oppose
them. There can be no neutrality in moral issues. By standing in
a ”no-man's land" most modern authors have actually levelled weapons
against traditional standards.

It is obvious to anyone who reads, that modern thinkers find
themselves unable to assert with certainty that one mode of conduct
is necessarily better than another. In the following lengthy reference
Nathan A. Scott, of the University of Chicago, quotes and interprets
the significant contention of Karl Mannheim regarding the causative
factor of the ethical paralysis manifested in literature. This state-
ment applies just as aptly to the breakdown in ethics in other forms
of communication, including politics and advertising:

In his important book Diagnosis of Our Time Karl Mannheim
prOposes the interesting and cogent hypothesis that the despiritual-
ization of modern life is best understood in terms of the gradual
evaporation in our period of authentic ”paradigmatic experience"
and of those great ”primordial images or archetypes" which,
being formed out of this kind of experience, have directed the
human enterprise in the most genuinely creative moments of
cultural history. By "paradigmatic experience" Dr. Mannheim
means those ”basic experiences which carry more weight than
others, and which are unforgettable in comparison with others
that are merely passing sensations. " Without experiences of
this kind, he says, "no consistent conduct, no character formation
and no real human coexistence and co-operation are possible.
Without them, our universe of discourse loses its articulation,
conduct falls to pieces, and only disconnected bits of successful
behaviour patterns and fragments of adjustment to an ever-
changing environment remain. " And his contention is that "para-
digmatic experience, ” in so far as it yields some conviction as
to what is radically significant, does also, in effect, yield a kind
of ”ontological hierarchy, " in accordance with which we say,
"'This is bad, this is good, this is better."' But, of course, the
whole drive of the positivistically oriented secularism of modern
culture has been towards such "a neutralization of that

 

'; {_JeLU' «ulna,
-9|
,‘Jtr-B .¢_ ‘3:
_'., - :1 3mm '
11:13:) 0:15".
,J. .:’;UL (1&1 i _f'
“.1359.
(j ‘.£t1fl1.‘.v.i
J. g “.11 need i"
‘. ‘ 1:110“. "$-
, T “(mam
41- out lid I” ,
, wv 'LII‘I'L‘)! ,1.
'c' i” -' cho 'n .. ‘
. 5;! mid 13' 37
u?" baorfi . l‘
’ ..1 ' inns
.-( Hz" in!!! 5 :1:
,“"’ It) 311 lb 1':
L.‘ ' . mam! 1&9!" -_;
'_{ rr m,- ,;rz:)lfl_‘ .:'-
:i" (:1 21113 36
I r (z! ’JOJJSQ'I'
; . ;)'-f.‘C:‘I.1"IflO‘_' .,
' " ,t‘vl;f.)1"!£:q£9".d‘;;
{:[nrti'osr' _ :—

 

479

ontological hierarchy in the world of experience" as encourages
the belief that "one experience is as important as any other"

and that the question of right or wrong is merely a question
concerning the most efficient environmental adjustments. So the
result has been the evaporation of those "primordial images"
which objectify a people's faith and provide the moral imagi-
nation with its basic premises. And when there are no "para-
digmatic experiences, " then nothing is any longer revealed as
having decisive importance, and men are ruled by a kind of
"kaleidoscopic concept of life” which, in giving an equal signifi-
cance to everything, does, in effect, attribute radical significance
to nothing at all. In such an age, the individual is condemned to
the awful prison of his own individuality, since nothing means
the same thing to any broad segment of people--and the primary
fact about the human community is disclosed as being the com-
plete collapse of anything at all resembling genuine community. 1

The transformation which has taken place in literature in the
last half century is obvious when one reads the classics. To browse
through Sophocles, Dante, Shakespeare, Jane Austen, Dickens, Scott,
and their like is to be aware that their ages possessed cultures of
vital unity wherein ethical agreement existed for 'the main part.

In contrast the modern writer must invent for himself a system of
values to interpret his world, and he has no assurance that his system
will parallel that of any of his readers.

. . . the writer has felt himself to be without a common back-
ground of reference by which his own imaginative faculties and
those of his readers might be oriented and brought into a pro-

found rapport with one another. So he has turned inward upon

himself, pursuing a system of values or beliefs in the world of
his own subjectivity.z

Writers such as James Joyce typify this modern subjectivity.
A society has been formed which makes periodical trips to Dublin in
search of scraps of information which might help in the interpretation

of Joyce's complex writings.

 

1Scott, pp. 6-8.
21bid., p. 12.

   
   
 
 
  
  
  
  
   
   
  
 
 
  
  

. . e e e . . .. . l ‘(d'flt’lititi
‘ . t v; 71;» 1:: utw" ‘U‘KU
- . _.. -;« than”:

  

T

_‘ ...- .Nhu ...... .'JDC-C'

 

9. v
?.%=.

  

in: 9'
p‘

.

1

‘i‘ r '1510 ”‘1‘;
V _- . -. ,7 " luf' q'r‘b 0:!
- Ti" an}!

u
-

aunt,
. 7; ' "7 .' £1510 ~ ‘1
tr‘...’ Mud !
;t‘.f'f-1u)9 3‘
.:': ~13“:qu
. i 7.:
v ‘ I
- .‘1 (L1 (4.!
, c c- .ir i5,

, , ~ um Js'xq-zi

_ . .« , .:‘ ‘25-; 4. EN! 151%.;
_ ‘. o

e L ‘ ~ , .72.; t.. 1;;1'3su‘i1w : '
1 ~ :» b.5151 loE-J
a '... ;:.L' V 3':'.Ll!b‘1 a“:
.v' {Hi 32:" ...
.’3 'niufi'x

‘ ‘3‘.’ -:'
,v ivboot
, v5) tug! '7. A" ’13?“ dg’m

";~ .10}! iii ' rsm'xrti ‘1‘"
r“.

’_ ..’ .l-’ .L!

“.:'; l a :vmruuluip

.8' r 1331': w

480

Such a phenomenon manifests the continuance of a trend com-
menced by the effect of the Enlightenment upon literature. Coleridge,
Wordsworth, Keats, and Shelley, the great English Romantics re-
flect in the wistful questioning of their poetry the unrest of spirit
ushered in by the iconoclasm of the preceding century. The absolutes
so long accepted by men seemed to be toppling from their pedestals.
In our own day this tendency has been accelerated. Literature as a
whole has received the stamp of Existentialism, not in the sense of
theological assertion but with the meaning that existence is essentially
problematic. This has molded art and music as well as literature.

. . . when, as Paul Tillich says, "the nineteenth century came
to an end" on the thirty-first of July, 1914, the existentialist
experience ceased to be the experience of a sensitive minority
and became the dominant experience of the age. In this century
it has furnished the perspectives of the philosophic tradition
that has been established by such thinkers as Berdyaev and
Shestov and Heidegger and JaSpers and Sartre and Marcel; it is
the experience that one feels in Stravinsky's Petrouchka, in
Schoenberg's Pierrot Lunaire, in Alan Berg's Wozzeck, in
Bartok's second Quartet, and in much of the great music of our
time; and it is also the experience that has been painted into
many of the canvases of such classic moderns as Picasso and
Rouault and the early de Chirico or of such recent artists as
Willem de Kooning and Jackson Pollock and Hans Hofmann.

Now it is this strain of sensibility that is central in much
of twentieth-century literature: it is what we recognize in such
poets of verse as Rainer Maria Rilke and Hart Crane and Robert
Penn Warren and Gottfried Benn and in such poets of the novel
as Conrad and Kafka and Faulkner and Malraux. Indeed, as
Lionel Trilling has remarked, "There is scarcely a great writer
of our own day who has not addressed himself to the ontological
crisis, who has not conceived of life as a struggle to be--not to
live, but to be. " And what one feels to be formative in much of
the representative literature of our period is a deep need for a
deep restoration of confidence in the stoutness and reliability and
essential healthiness of the things of earth. The trauma that has
been suffered is the trauma that is inflicted upon the imagination
when it appears that both God and man are dead. 1

 

 

 

1Scott, p. 25.

‘H ”hilt l mlclflm

m3) _. rat {to - ‘1‘,“ -
..»-. , .JJZUH ”Lt,
9&3:ka
5‘13 yd" _'
r X" 123C”

-.1 r541 ‘(nb'

r

:1. .:‘.U ”0.3 :1 '

. '1 L-J‘HL'I;
.t‘; . ”5 {:9 m...
"~"Ilbti v

, LI‘J7irabd ...

.'

an 'r.r:r.-.~...‘
"' ed: 16,
r {13 '
I‘m” :15 5.4.7
.J-' 3 won? 3 --
UA-CIJL - 4 . r:
Leftifl‘l w. ' 3
j J; 5'51 WWI
, I'LL [‘35 V 1"
.1117. .:jn‘ilIi-x'l‘, ' 5.18
I H ' ‘(fib mvé’.
w 3: 1‘ and or»
JV ”.5d Oi! _‘
35‘; rt'xiinz'nsaéj‘
' [2023.8 ‘ f
,3; ! itijiaefl‘

 

 

481

Nietzsche's lofty assumption of superior knowledge in his pro-
nouncement that ”God is dead" has had extensive influence. Men
have come to regard life as a "tale told by an idiot, full of sound and
fury, but signifying nothing." Life appears to such as "a dusty
scuffle- across a parched terrain, " or as a mere “fuss in the mud"
or "stir in the slime. " The race is viewed as a temporary planetary
eczema. The cry goes forth that humanity has been abandoned "in
some blind lobby . . . or corridor of Time. And in that dark [there
can be found] no thread. "1 Such pessimistic conviction of necessity
Spawns a literature that is unethical because it is inherently amoral.
Sorokin refers to "the pathological bent in literature, painting and
sculpture. "

In these fields the "heroes” are the Babbitts, the Elmer Gantrys,
the warped and morbid characters of Hemingway and Steinback,
Chekhov and Gorke, D'Annunzio, and the like, consisting of
insane and criminal types, hypocrites, the disloyal, the wrecks
and derelicts of humanity, interSpersed here and there with
mediocrities. The criminals and detectives of our "relaxation
literature" and "thrillers" only serve to emphasize the point.
In the field of drama most of the personages, as in Chekhov's,
Gorki's, and O'Neill's works, are morbid, warped derelicts or
downright criminals, or at best, sheer mediocrities. Even more
striking are the pathology and vulgarity that prevail in our
motion pictures. The main prescription of the typical scenario
is very simple. A society girl falls in love with a gangster,
which demonstrates that he is not a gangster but a hero. Or
else the roles are reversed, a prostitute ensnaring a juvenile
society ”sucker". In the two cases the ”moral" is much the
same. Statistical studies show that from 70 to 80 percent of all
cinema offerings concentrate on crime and sexual love.

The same trend is exhibited by contemporary European
and American paintings and sculpture.1

To sum up, contemporary art is primarily a museum of
social and cultural pathology. It centers in the police morgue,

 

lRobert Penn Warren, Brother to Dragons, cited by Scott, p. 26.
2Sorokin, p. 66.

 

 

   
   
  
 
   
   
   
    

. - ' ' h ‘v- '1-‘9‘E 3.. ’ .
; V . H Jlillitil

. fi.‘
_ ~ ‘ - ‘ ~ 1 '. ...-.1: 03375 A.

» - - « flirrgié

,'>
. j j J; l-‘lU’ID-

‘ .c -.mutb ‘: '

. ,getn‘ a:

. ‘( mil bx!“
' , .. ;,‘o ['11 may,
_ cw enroll! 8

f ,‘ .1 115-£51133; "

t l V \" ‘
H»
- Liz.
.
‘l ,
Hot} 93$;
1' ->
; JJ '
(
l
c , .:‘ , A‘

. c .;"!J."-

.; 1 {via Y7???
.. . , _zd- r [.5515 d

i e - . in 1.6111 at“. "

- “'5 fr; aih‘nzta

7 - - 3 Jae-fin 1;,

-~ i 7 - ' e it use de’i- ‘.
~ v > ‘ 1 ~‘ ' .v

7 ‘ '.: '_.'r-.n~53s'1--.fl‘

 

482

the criminal's hide-out, and the sex organs, operating mainly
on the level of the social sewers. If we are forced to accept
it as a faithful representation of human society, then man and
his culture must certainly forfeit our reSpect and admiration.
In so far as it is an art of man's debasement and vilification,
it is paving the way for its own downfall as a cultural value. 1

We would now proceed to briefly trace the ethical course of
history, indicating the possible causes for the decline in ethical values

which is manifest in all aSpects of communication today.

Most writers upon ethics have pointed out that what man does

 

is always conditioned by his concept of what man is. Ethics are always

based upon a world-view, a Weltanschauung. Thus it can be said that

 

philosophy and theology have determined most systems of ethics. We
would briefly trace the dominant concepts of the three great ages of
civilization, the ancient, mediaeval and modern. This will enable us
to see our age in perSpective and perhaps suggest the fundamental
causes of our present ethical breakdown.

. . . the ancient mind, the medieval mind, the modern mind
stand apart through a warfare of the intellect more than through
force of muscle and sword. Each epoch is distinguished from

the others by a diverse way of discerning facts and of assessing
their importance. Peculiar to each is a genius, a certain
homogeneity of outlook which requires a distinction between them.
And the struggle of our moment, in the arena of world affairs,

is not intelligible apart from this larger conflict of ideologies,
whose broad outlines are exhibited to us in the great Speculative
divides of the history of ideas.2

When the distinctive values of an age crumble in the hearts of the
contemporaries, the collapse of that age is at hand. Such proved true
in the Hellenic world of the fourth century B. C. and again in the Roman

Empire between the 3rd, and 5th centuries A.D.

 

11hid., p. 67.
2Henry, The Drift, pp. ll-lZ.

 

483

. . . the present trouble represents the disintegration of the
sensate form of Western culture and society, which emerged at
the end of the twelfth century and gradually replaced the declin-
ing ideational form of medieval culture. For the past four
centuries it has been dominant. In the period of its ascendancy
and climax it created the most magnificent cultural values in
most of the compartments of Western culture. During these
centuries it wrote one of the most brilliant pages in human
history. However, no finite form, either ideational or sensate,
is eternal. Sooner or later it is bound to exhaust its creative
abilities. When this moment comes, it begins to disintegrate
and decline. So it has happened several times before, in the
history of a number of the leading cultures of the past; and so
it is happening now with our sensate form, which has apparently
entered its decadent stage. Hence the magnitude of the crisis
of our time. 1

Sorokin believes that the three main supersystems of culture are the
idealistic, ideational, and the sensate systems. By idealistic is meant
that form of culture resulting from a synthesis of the knowledge that
comes through reason and revelation, while the ideational culture is

that based chiefly upon revelation, and the sensate is built predominantly
upon the testimony of the senses. This author (Sorokin) suggests that

the crisis of our age has resulted from a reversion to a sensate culture,

and its denial of idealism.

Any sensory value, as soon as it is put on a plane of relativistic
and utilitarian convention, is bound to retrogress, becoming
more and more relative, more and more conventional, until it
reaches a stage of "atomization" in its relativism and of utter
arbitrariness in its ever thinner and less universal conventionality.
The final stage is bankruptcy. This is a brief summary of how
and why the salt of sensate ethico-juridical values came to lose
its savor. If the essence of moral and juridical values is utility
and sensory happiness, then everyone has the right to pursue
these values ad libitum. As pleasure, utility, and sensory
happiness diff-gr with different persons and groups, one is entitled
to pursue them in the way one pleases and by any means at his
diSposal. As there is no limit to the expansion of sensory desires

 

lSorokin, pp. 28 - 29.

   
     
   
    
 
  
   
  
   
   
   
    

- _Mm t3 juanu'x ft ‘
n . -_-; uzoV' it irb‘x -" ‘. '
_ , ") (HIM w;l LI“ '3 .
. a“ 1.!“ 3 .‘J‘uflo ;' '1‘:

that! :zriri .23 I r

- , L. “‘8101
. (lebqqsd

.c m t "..J‘ 7:3} 1': L
I"-

[.urtflth'i ; ‘

,c . ; ,,, .:v n.) have: M”
o ’.

I

. -t , 'zutiJiiab' :

,, U'JJJJLIJIJ‘ ..

1;
- ,e, r. manor ([3 '.,’ W
. _ ‘P

; ,L. 1 mm; ‘(Jb‘fli' ‘

I
.
1.!t;‘_

”I

. . A ' J a
. - 'e‘ .1311 ‘(HOlflg
I I

.. .'i L'. "..I::‘ 0,013 '10,. .~'

.1 s-Unoti 10“.”
‘4 Mi}-
' ' ,sm‘mx Y'IO‘;_
, .; i, 1' {Jihad _
,L."il.‘,1£1 o'xrm U41}:

if; 2'” -:u 551.17: dig/7r. '
. ; I: mi Hi 28:.
.r .1 If": a]: 931:. r
‘21....‘.‘:1'1'(';1I.Gaa"'
;. .:' . Last. 311:) II
L.in ," not rqqfilf '
’ .:. midil 65 839'

:23. :. r131. jib

 

 

 

484

for sensory values, the available amount of these sensory
values finally becomes insufficient to satisfy the desires and
appetites of all the individuals and groups. The dearth of these
values in turn, leads to a clash of individuals and groups.
Under such circumstances the struggle is bound to become
ever sharper, more intensive, and more diversified in its
means and forms. 1

While it is not possible neat-1y and precisely to place the jumbled
phiIOSOphies of any age into a convenient single category it is possible
to determine the chief bent of the dominant beliefs. The ancient world-
view which we would here gquate with the classical philOSOphy of the
Graeco-Roman world was idealistic, the medieval world, through most
of its course, ideational, while from the sixteenth century to the
present, a sensate culture has predominated.

Another distinction between cultures should be made. The modern
sensate age is naturalistic, denying supernaturalism and revelation,
such a position regards man as in essence on a parity with other animals.
But the preceding cultures (Graeco-Roman and Medieval) believed in the
existence of a purposeful Spiritual realm beyond the senses, and
parallel with this belief was the concept that man was of a superior
order to other creatures.

With these distinctions in mind let us glance separately at each
of these periods and their accompanying system. First what shall
we say of the ancient mind?

Classic philosophy, the loftiest scaffolding for Graeco-Roman
culture, was unambiguously idealistic. To the supernatural
realm, the ancient mind in this influential expression assigned
logical priority. Only in relation to an eternal, purposive,
spiritual sphere are nature and man meaningful. Man is quali-
tatively superior to the animals because of this rational link to
the supernatural; he is not merely a creature of time and Space.
Moral distinctions are objective and eternal, not merely relative
and arbitrary. z

 

11bid., p. 159.
zHenry, The Drift, p. 14.

 

485

Socrates, Plato and Aristotle offered a rebuttal to the earlier Greek
naturalism of Democritus and the SOphists. With prolonged success
the three giants dominated the Graeco—Roman culture. When the
philosoPhy of Stoicism and Epicureanism gained a foothold, then the
seeds of decaywere sown for the collapse of a civilization.

The medieval world was the transformation by official Christian-
ity of a previous shattered age. Men with the viewPoint of Augustine
molded the chief characteristics of the Middle Ages. The Christians
were in agreement with the Greek idealists in affirming the reality
of the supernatural and the supremacy of man. There was a significant

divergence, however, in their vieWpoint concerning the nature of homo

 

Sapiens. The Christian revelation stressed that man was a fallen being,

 

and to fail to take into account the noetic effect of sin was to miss the
mark. Thus man from this standpoint is not now viewed as rationally
competent in ethical areas unless aided by revelation.

Nonetheless, there emerged in medieval times a distinc-
tive culture, a synthesis in which the tensions of time and etern-
ity were pointed for their resolution to the Biblical view of
life. The segregation of medieval history, of medieval philoso-
phy, of a medieval in contrast with the ancient and modern minds,
is not a wholly artificial thing. No less than in our times, a
certain way of discerning facts and of appraising their value and
significance distinguished the medieval era, so that diversity of
outlook and inner conflict was a phenomenon secondary to the
basic intellectual temperament. The medieval genius worked
itself out in a constructive Spirit which, in contrast with the
modern cultural disunity, creates constantly in subsequent
centuries a longing for its reincarnation, even if in a purified
form freed of the perversions of Roman ecclesiasticism. That
synthesis was, in intent, theological rather than philosoPhical;
it centered in the conviction that the self-revealing God had
rescued mankind from both hell and pagan savagery. 1

 

1Ihid. , pp. 32-33.

' ALPIYVI

f
s,

_‘- ~i‘4L‘

F‘”.

i';-.

.:’}

'lrrr

-(
~--

,

entire

1.11' E51

 

.
.
.
r
.
L

 

 

486

We live now in what many would call ”the twilight" of the third
system of culture, the modern period. This is a sensate age with
emphasis upon naturalism, and with manifestation of widespread
revolt against revelation and its implied Spiritual realm. Beginning
about 1650, man began to glimpse a wider universe than ever before
contemplated. With the vision came an inferiority complex which
was ready to accept the positivistic views which were the offSpring of

the mechanical interpretation of nature. The initial success of

l

Newtonianism seemed to explain the movements of the Inorganic, and

men imagined that the actions of the human being could be explained
on Similar premises. With the eighteenth century came the Age of
Reason, which predicated that man was naturally both rational and
”good" and that education could usher in Ut0pia. Such beliefs were
later furthered by the writings of Marx, Darwin, Nietzsche, and their
kin. By the end of the nineteenth century almost every respected
thinker believed in the Law of Progress.

The central postulate of the modern mind, in its final
expression, has been the ultimacy of nature.

This central affirmation carries with it much else that
is important. To declare that nature alone is the ultimate
real, so that all reality takes its rise in and through differentia-
tions of the natural world, is to declare at the same time that
man is essentially an animal and that moral distinctions are
only subjective and relative. It is to deny, that is, the reality
of anything--gods, souls, values, or anything else--unsubject
to time and change.

By this central postulate, the modern mind places itself
definitely over against the ancient and medieval minds. From
the standpoint of both earlier views, when taken together, the
distinctive modern prejudice is its denial of the reality of the
supernatural. 7'

 

1It should be kept in mind that Newton and many other pioneers
of the age of science were Christian in philosophy and believed in
supernaturalism. Nevertheless, their discoveries were construed by
later generations as demonstrating a mechanistic universe.

zHenry, The Drift, p. 41.

 

487

The modern notions that the world of nature is the primary
reality and that man is to be explained on mechanistic premises, have
undergirded much of prevailing education. In a $2500 award for
educators only, the prize went to Professor Stace, author of

The Destiny of Western Man. A prominent member of the committee

 

who selected the winner was Carl Van Doren, who affirmed that this
book was one of "world-wide significance, sure to clarify and fortify
contemporary opinion and to leave its mark on years to come. "
Declared Stace in his book:

"The Greeks, therefore, had in general no right to their belief
that man is superior to the other animals. . . . And therefore
we can not admit the validity of that argument in favor of the
primacy of reason which bases itself upon man's superiority to
the rest of creation. "1

The implications as regarding ethics of such philosophy is

obvious .

. . . why strive at all, if the end of man is but a square meal
for lower animals? Shall their welfare stimulate us to live
honestly rather than dishonestly? Will it affect their diet any
if we commit fornication or if we refrain from it? Will the
maggots complain about their menu if we are plunged into an
atom war“?2

Strangely enough the full significance of the mechanistic philOSOphy,
suggested in the preceding quotation, did not immediately come home
to mankind. A liberal ethic prevailed until World War I. This liberal
ethic, on the basis that the universe is run by rational laws, asserted
that the moral life of society should also be governed by laws which can
be discovered by the reason. Such laws of course were a very much

watered-down version of the Christian ethic. Man believed that inasmuch

 

lStace, The Destiny of Western Man, cited by Ana O'Neill,
Ethics for the Atomic Age (Boston: Meador Publishing Co. , 1948),

p. 52.
ZCarnell, p. 333.

 

488

as man is essentially good, rational procedures will be followed once
understood. Thus the great majority never understood all the impli-
cations of mechanism, or of evolution. Only a few, such as Nietzsche,
carried these theories to their logical conclusion. It was after 1850
that it began to appear that "reason could be used to dethrone reason. "

Freud and his theories of psychoanalysis seemed to Show that
rational man was a figment of the imagination, and that man

was governed by a set of irrational drives. Pavlov, Watson and
others produced evidence which seemed to Show that, even worse,
man is merely a set of automatic conditioned reflexes. And,
finally, developments in the field of subatomic physics seemed to
Shatter the very citadel of the liberal outlook, objective natural
law. 1

The generation after 1900 was the last generation which
lived in a calm belief in liberal ethics. That generation marked
the twilight of liberalism though few realized it at the time. The
basic assumptions of the liberal outlook were under attack by the
ablest thinkers of the day. And, deSpite the social gosPel, a
slightly modified liberalism had been unable to cope with the
underlying problems of the Age of the Machine.

Liberal complacency was shattered, in Europe, by the
first World War; and in America, by the great depression.
Liberal ethics were regarded more and more as old-fashioned.
In Italy, Germany, and Russia, liberalism was denounced as
reactionary superstition as new faiths struggled for supremacy.
By 1950, in Western Europe, the once-great liberal political
parties were reduced to impotence, and liberal ethics regarded
as Victorian nonsense. z

The idea of progress has been smashed, and also the concept of
the natural goodness of man. Thus, since World War I particularly,
there has been a breakdown in ethics. Some nations and communities
have moved faster than others. Russia has incorporated amorality

into her national scheme. Hitlerfiand Mussolini did the same. The

 

lDirk Jellema, "Ethics, " Contemporary Evangelical Thought,
ed. Carl F. H. Henry (New York: Channel Press, 1957), p. 11?.

2Ibid. ,

 

 

 

.
_Sfltu

 

489

evidence reviewed in the first part of this paper indicate that even in
America the trends are a startling repetition of the breakdown in
ethical communication in Fascist, and Communist countries. The
intelligentsia of 1960 is not sure that it can be sure about anything.

If any god is to be worshipped, it is the god of science, but inasmuch
as this god has now created issues which could result in the disintegra-
tion of the globe it is uncertain that even he Should be adored as before.
Because of this dilemna, some voices are to be heard asserting that
we stand at the end of one age but on the threshold of another. For
example Monsignor Fulton Sheen declares that "'the Signs of our times
point to two inescapable truths: (l) we have come to the end of the
post-Renaissance chapter of history which made man the measure of
all things, and (2) we are at the end of a non-religious era ofciviliza-

”1

tion. Sorokin also looks for a new age to follow the recognition of

the barrenness of our present sensate culture.2
If mankind is to emerge successfully from this present crisis,

however, one fundamental question must first be answered, involving

as it does the very crux of all ethical systems. This question has to

do with the freedom of man. If mechanism and behaviorism speak the

whole truth concerning man, then moral freedom is a delusion.
Informed writers in many areas have discussed in recent years

the significance of the new developments in physics which have abolished

the mechanistic view which sired Determinism. Gerald Heard briefly

sums up the Situation as follows:

Not until Planck's and Einstein's work became accepted in this
last half century was it possible for ordinary informed people

 

1Monsignor Fulton Sheen, ”Signs of the Times, ” American
Representative Speeches 1947, ed. by A. C. Baird.

 

 

ZSorokin, p. 324 passim.

490

to realize how 'constructional' the universe is, how largely it
consists of only a mental supposition. As the intimate relation-
ship of Time with Space began to be grasped the picture made by
Descartes and finished off by Newton began to melt away.

Thought and sensation came back as the basic experiences--not
extension and mass. Man's freedom to act is, however, even
more important than the discovery that he is on a scale that
counts. It is here that the new cosmogony has changed our view
point. Rigid causality, the dread of the moralist, the pride of

the mechanist, has gone. How great that reaction to liberty
actually is, how completely the old tyranny of necessitarianism
has been undermined, still only experts seem aware and moral-
ists, like animals too long held captive and close confined, do not
seem able to step out of their cages, though the bars are shown

to be only shadows. But when such an authority as Prof. A. March
can say (Natur and Erkenntnis: die Welt in der Konstrukton die
heutigen Physikers) ”the individual phenomena are not subject to
the law of causation though it applies to mass phenomena", we see
that we have been living (if afraid to act on that liberating knowl-
edge) in a world of lawful freedom, the precise environment
required for moral behaviour. Law has returned to Probability
and man is restored to the basis of morality, freedom of choice.
These facts have been well publicised by Dr. Lecomte du Nouy

in his Human Destiny and The Road to Reason. They have also
been enlarged upon by Sir Edmund Whittaker in his Space and
Spirit (The Donnellan Lecture, 1946). 1

 

 

 

 

 

The progress in pure Physics has yielded many further
remarkable finds that bear on morality--such as the estimated
age of the Universe, Showing that it had a definite beginning and,
apparently, will have a definite end when its vast structure and
span will contract and vanish and 'leave not a wrack behind. '

It was created out of no material and it will, having achieved life
and mind, cease to be. The supremely important point is that
the study of the inorganic has established man's freedom, the
essential postulate of his morality. z

The same writer sums up the results of modern researchin the fields

of Biology, Anthropology, and Psychology, pointing out that much has

 

lGerald Heard, Morals Since 1900 (London: Andrew Dakers Ltd. ,
1950), pp. 162-163.

zIhid. , p. 163.

 

   
  
   
  
   
   
   
   
   

'..' I" mm :1’ (1!" l:
.ij. LIX: 2: ‘(L-‘J 3d:— a
g .71} (1.11" arr ‘
manta 1:le; an}
. 13L 1.1: :1 bnfi
..ut m1. :1 .
Jff. mtqtfl‘
; -'.‘ ;." : I iii 3I 3 ""
. 1 ,.w.ir:.k.d~’13"_~'
3;. If .91"! ,1 _
' I _' "L.»flllf'-":r'
r » , .v in: 01111“
. .; "I, {.1th
3 _ , iii ":‘(111‘1‘ , :3“:
mm?) Y5

‘ ”4
l . ,f
i eve. .
r, .

,L '1'. 5112!?”wa
3: “.‘J'i llrf ‘Y _
' :Jnirijnoa

. r;.'r.'1r-M ,3 4‘?
"-.---~ ._ (,5; “(17‘
.86

. p! :1!"

‘-

. r“; : ,

 

491

been demonstrated in these areas this century which refutes the nine-
teenth century concept of the universe.

Irving Langmuir Speaks similarly when he declares that ”the
net result of modern principles of physics has been to wipe out almost

"1 He also asserts that there is

completely the dogmas of causation.
"no justification whatever for science teaching that general causes
(convergent phenomena) dominate in human affairs over the results of
individual action (divergent phenomena). " "The mistaken emphasis of
convergent phenomena in human affairs, and the reliance on so-called
scientific methods has been reSponsible in large degree for much of
the cynicism of the last few decades. "2
Yet another writer says:

Both Nevius and Hocking believe that the current shift in physics
from the older Newtonian physics to the new relativity and atomic
physics is seriously damaging to the naturalistic program. . . if
the contentions of such men as H. Weyl, A. Compton, J. Jeans,
W. Carr, A. Eddington, and F. Northr0p are correct, then it is
conceivable that fifty more years of science will see an abandon-
ment of the naturalistic program itself by the scientists.3

-Quotations could be multiplied to show that the belief in determin-
ism rests on very shaky grounds and should shortly be laid to rest.
The essential point, however, is that this bugaboo which seemed to
menace the basis of morals, by questioning human freedom, has been
dissipated. Here again, humanity has been slow as a whole to catch
up on the implications of recent developments, and thus our prevalent

chaos continues .

 

llrving Langmuir, "Science, Common Sense, and Decency, "
Vital Speeches Vol. 9, 1942..

zIbid.

 

 

3Bernard Ramm, Protestant Christian Evidences (Chicago:
Moody Press, 1954), p. 58.

 

, O
“296.: x 2 no

u
' L1 fl,, 7
.u I ,lrl‘tco‘

 

   
  
  
  
   
 
    
  
    
   
    

.u 1(1): no

F,.’,‘(| l x0576 .
« ~'.t- “int: (1';
am: , mg;
(‘1 u wrwfiq . t,

A'

- ; 1!) 1165339.. "
‘ n

‘
.'Q4"1.lioffil V‘

. 4“ (‘If‘ I-'

, m in ad .
x‘ "’

O
' numb z,
. .‘

nuivan' :
- ~s'1'! MH‘ A- ,
J i'zlfli 31

H.) "J 0.32411” » 4-
. V 1 i '
,f .16 ,‘1 2‘ A
.1. ,1 ‘13 old .
,.

,2

‘ m: r‘ 5113‘ ‘9
., .

Jun-.3319 n...

a ‘ I" .
,' 15:44)) 51. ‘. "2

(.I.! :f.["(7:‘36$ it“; I.
y“. '

492

What then should be the standard of ethics in communication and
other areas ? Are we to agree with Bertrand Russell that "outside
human desires there is no moral standard? "I Is there indeed any
authoritative moral credo that can lift man beyond the level of the
slave-pen, the stud farm, and the jungle? In reply we would suggest
that if the lessons of history are read aright, we will no longer depend
upon human reason to formulate a code of behavior. This has been
tried and found wanting, just as certainly as the modern absence of
any code at all has been found disastrous. Likewise the idealism of
Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle were found to lack the necessary dynamic
to save civilization from disaster. What then remains? Some would
suggest that what remains is that haughty man should acknowledge his
insufficiency and glance afresh at the Biblical record of Divine Reve-
lation, eSpecially its Pauline form. As has been said by another--it
is not the case that Christianity has been tried and found wanting, it
has merely been found difficult and therefore not tried further. The
race has been inoculated with such a small amount of the GosPel as
now to appear almost immune to its real power. Nevertheless, if the
power of love does not soon replace the contemporary love of power,
mankind will be placed in that position where it will no longer need to

concern itself further about ethics--or indeed anything else.

 

lBertrand Russell, cited by Horace J. Bridges, Humanity on
Trial (New York: Liveright Publishing Corporation, 1941), p. 21.

 

 

CHAPTER IX

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

It is now our purpose to take a retrOSpective view of the past
chapters, and then to set forth certain conclusions regarding the
significance of this study for the field of rhetoric and public address.

In the first two chapters, which discussed the world of Paul's
day including its rhetorical cast, we considered a milieu which was
in many ways opposite to the phenomena manifested in the life and
ideology of the Apostle. The world of Paul's day was the world of
Classicism, which emphasized man's ability to organize and maintain
an environment favorableto culture and happiness. 1 In the work of
Augustus had been seen the culminating attempt to implement the
philos0phy of the ancient Greek aristocrats who believed that virtue
and strength combined on man's part could create and perpetuate a
UtOpian society. DeSpite the great accomplishments of the Empire
as it welded disparate people into comparative harmony, there were
also threatening cracks in its facade. The pOpularity of Epicureanism,
and the degeneration of most ancient philosophical schools, suggested
that the character of most Romans was not calculated to bear success-
fully, or long, the burdens of Empire. Similarly, the eagerness with
which multitudes accepted the Oriental mystery religions which offered
them psychological escape indicated the same fact. Other evidences

of the prevailing moral malaise included the weakened state of the

 

lThe Classicism here referred to should not be confused with
the special use of the term by teachers of rhetoric. Chapter I contains
a description of the wider meaning of the Classicism mentioned above.

493

494

family as the individual unit of society, the casual and careless attitude
towards the individual's right to exist, and the ennervating and brutaliz-
ing institution of slavery.

Rhetoric in this age, it was noted, reflected the contemporary
pragmatism and lack of idealism which characterized the attitudes of
the masses. As surely as the majority in the Empire fell short of the
demands of Classical thought in general, so orators had ceased to
respect the rhetorical standards of Aristotle, Isocrates, and Cicero.
Paul's age was the age of the Second Sophistic, when oratory became
the medium of giving effectiveness merely to a speaker, rather than to
a message of truth. The canons of rhetoric had become reversed in
order of importance, with delivery and style as the chief emphases.
Invention was almost ignored, except as it existed in ready-to-hand
forms. There no longer seemed to exist the compulsion of great themes
demanding expression. Instead, orators devoted themselves to de-
clamation as the means for displaying a dazzling array of verbal

devices and oratorical tricks. In virtuosity, dilation, pattern, and

 

elaboration of style are to be found the hallmarks of the prevailing

 

rhetoric in the Empire. 1

These characteristics suggest the ethical
vacuum which necessarily accompanied such theory and practice.
Cicero's depiction of the virtuous and learned orator was regarded at
this time as very much outmoded. Indeed, Quintilian's later emphasis

upon ”the good man skilled in Speaking" was probably the result of his

 

beholding of the reverse among orators during the first century A.D.
As we thus consider the deteriorated rhetoric and oratory of

Paul's day, it should also be remembered that the tone of prevailing

education was inevitably marred by this phenomenon. Ancient edu-

cational theory revolved around rhetoric, and the degeneration of the

 

1C. S. Baldwin, Medieval Rhetoric and Poetic (Gloucester,
Mass.: Peter Smith, 1959), pp. 9-49.

 

  
   
  
   
  
 
 
    
   
   
   

'iuu quIkv

‘. .
u 1‘ ‘L'rlsul‘h I" '
. {217‘ In )0 - -

‘ ._.|

. I l Ilfl' n‘z -_

.....it: .
[H’InifiA ..’I

‘ .[fIH Aguuan?;EL

L-Ir “11‘1"; n

_,_
-I . -, I. on «my ;

- . . I... , ill; It: ~
. . - ' s h
.I ,IIHI'I) k), -' ‘
I? L c.3109; L' x
,4 ..1111aw”'
- _ . .rl(4 axe-I}
._
I. T .- mimesfi
Mn! n- or}:
. In "“45"". .
'~ "I was .:.:':
r...” .'f' “131 0m .,
~ ' ‘ :
Lw'moogq.w
. 4'“)
' (L? in 0013. 4,: ,
;I In 51:11:“ W9 .
v V
M!

.I. I.'.I'i:.an5m_ I:

I; L31 Bil/91‘
IL; aliases, 3

c' :d ”an: bk.

.y
5.. '. fL’T! «(Edi-31 .
'I’ "f: E‘Q‘Im

 

 

495

latter guaranteed the subsequent depreciation of the former. Thus it
remains as a matter of history that the age of the Second SoPhistic
extended even beyond the fall of the Empire, influencing for ill the
system of medieval education.

With these facts in mind, it becomes apparent that Paul, in
ideology and methodology, was an anomaly for his times. The religion
he eSpoused cannot be equated with the contemporary Oriental religions
because it transcended them in every way. It is only necessary to
contrast the intellectual and moral content of Pauline theology with the
emotional emphasis in such a moral worship as that of Dionysius to
become aware of the great gulf between Christianity and the older cults.
Similarly, the doctrines of Paul stand in direct opposition to Epicurean-
ism and to Classicism. Love and reverence for Christ, rather than
the love of pleasure and self, motivated the Apostle in all things, and
characterized his teachings. In his concept of the nature of man and
of the temporal element in which man moves, Paul was diametrically
opposed to the tenets of Classicism. He believed that man by nature
was depraved and was in every instance gravitating downwards to
certain destruction unless Divine Grace should miraculously intervene.
As for Time, the Apostle considered that this moved to the grand
culmination of the Kingdom of God. Such a view was a bold antithesis
to the pagan ideas concerning endless cycles and the reign of chance.

This distinctive? ideology of Paul's inevitably issued in behavior
and methodology which were likewise distinctive. In chapters three
and four of this dissertation, the training, life and influence of the
Apostle were briefly surveyed. Beyond all doubt, Paul synthesized
in himself many of the elements of the Hellenistic world such as the
cosmopolitan spirit; but over and beyond this was the dominant factor

of his belief in a crucified Jewish malefactor as the Divine Son of God,

 

496

and Savior of the world. The Jewish Messianic hope had been Paul's
inheritance, but it was the Christian realization of that hope which
confronted him on the Damascus road with compelling and transform-
ing power. While we may point to Tarsus, Jerusalem, and Rome as
sources which contributed to the making of the Apostle to the Gentiles,
it is the enigmatic and inexplicable experience of the Damascus Road
which did most to mold and energize this unique figure. He believed
himself henceforth to be Christ's man, called for the purpose of
evangelizing the Gentile world, and inviolate from death or failure till
his taskshould be completed. Whether or not we accept Paul's explana-
tion of his call, the fulfillment of the commission eSpoused by him
confronts us as a fact which has inevitably influenced our own daily
experience in this world of the twentieth century. "Had it not been for
Paul . . . no man would now remember Greek and Roman civilization. "1
More important still, had it not been for Paul, Christianity would never
have taken root in the Western world as it did in the first two centuries
of our era.

As we now survey the Apostle from our own age, it is his
rhetorical accomplishments in the form of the New Testament epistles,
rather than the record of his missionary accomplishments, which
characterize him. Probably the former was reSponsible in great degree
for the latter. While it is impossible to predict in matters of this sort,
one is tempted to speculate whether Paul could have been as one-tenth
successful in his task had he been other than an accomplished orator.
Judging from the records of the book of Acts, it was the stirring
eloquence of Paul which captured both pagans and Jews for Christ.

Furthermore, it seems evident from the New Testament, that this

 

1W. M. Ramsay, Pauline and Other Studies, p. 53, cited by
Wilbur Smith, Therefore Stand, p. 247.

 

 

   
    
   
    
   

_,.' '7, ‘ .t .I.:(Iw

IMIJ'ILL.‘ 3i M».
. I“.
,5". 313': L0- .‘ "
; 3;: I' a it!
, :31...)le U

‘ " 5"“”‘51-,”.
I. ..3 :m - '

I .‘ (12110100 ’_

.,:‘ ”13 :fi.

‘ l - v\
- . Ld 1.5;,th
o",
1 -_.r'.3 Jim”; .

:1 t u: 811‘ ;.
. ‘
. - . aid? {if «'-i-_
O .
c. i _ :3! V; _'.‘JJ‘Y “a .‘
.. ..fl ,(yi'ffl 3!: :3' 1'.
. r_
-- 1;. all; It? *3”
r

. y‘ '
. v D t ‘
I ‘ “
, e I: '{o 17112;: wed I

' .IZUNJEJZC' 4.0!.
I . _I‘ | ';(_|:Jo* s.::.:
. ,
. s. X’ '
l- ;1 ,M
m1 .

- ..., 2.2 exmw Wit .I

J .: f
I“. .I .23 Annette 01‘ L“ .'
-: Q L (. LII zibBfi' -.._I.

, 4.2.4 .I." 3r 20951:!
I .
' . ctnjrzsm rhifm '

.
4
0‘

r ' 1.; *1 of 1:75; tamed?

 

:5 er rim; , ,1:
.' , ”:37 L'Jt‘m,

 

497

same ability did much to hold together the tempted and tried com-
munities of the early Church.

In our detailed analyses in chapter five of seven of Paul's
written discourses, it was found that they fulfill to a large degree
the lofty requirements of classical rhetoric. It is even more evident
that they do not reflect the character of the oratory of the Second
Sophistic. First place was given by Paul to the processes of invention.
He is pre-eminently a logician if we understand this word in the con-
text of rhetoric to mean one who competently marshals the evidence
of probabilities. The epistle to the Galatians is the best example of
Paul's habit of succinct and yet exhaustive reasoning, as a review of
the analysis should make plain. The Apostle, however, is not an un-
emotional individual who thinks purely in logical terms. On the con-
trary he was admittedly guilty of often wearing "his heart on his
sleeve, " and of‘bringing emotional pressure to bear on his hearers.
He argues from such emotions as his audience's love for him, and his
love for them. The name of Christ, which inevitably conjured up strong
religious feeling, is found stamped on every page dictated by the

Apostle. Motivation derived from the Atonement of Calvary, the hOpe

 

 

of the second advent, the reward of the righteous, and the punishment

 

 

of the wicked, is constantly employed by Paul. He dwells much on

 

the centralities of existence, pain and pleasure, Opposition and fellow-
ship, punishment and reward, labor and rest, evil and good, death
and life. Few of his arguments are solely philosophical, and they are
nowhere merely tinctured with overtones derived from motives and
emotions. Instead, the analyses reveal that the discussion almost
always focuses on the realities of daily experience, and it is just as
fully charged with feeling as these same experiences in every person's

life. 1‘ Thus in 1 Thessalonians Paul's purpose is to inSpire the

498

bereaved with hOpe. He does so by appealing to Christ's own victory
over death and His promised return to resurrect all who "sleep in

Him. " The Apostle does not leave the matter there, but with the

genius of a pragmatist he asserts that such hOpe will inSpire to con-
stant diligence in daily duties. rather than to a mystical withdrawal from
the affairs of this present world.

He goes so far as to say that "if a man does not work, neither
should he eat. " Such an example as this from the discourses to the
Thessalonians is typical of the Apostle's mingling of reason and
emotion, of the ideal and the real. He nowhere considers it beneath
him to discuss salvation and daily toil in the same breath.

A similar example of the linking of the theoretical and the practical
was noted in 1 Corinthians, where Paul leads on naturally from his
discussion of church divisions, immorality, andlitigation, to a pris-
matic analysis of the virtue of love. While the themes of this discourse
are pre-eminently practical, they are supported‘by arguments from
lofty ideals. Because Christians are "the members of the body of
Christ, " they dare not lend' their physical members to immorality.
Because one day they will judge even the fallen angels, they ought here
and now be able to judge adequately in temporal affairs without having
resource to Gentile courts. Because the virtue of love transcended
in value the "showy" talents, the Corinthians were to exercise courtesy
and self-control in their church-services, rather than viewing such
occasions as opportunities for display. These points illustrate the

practical and effective motivation employed by Paul.

Ethos, the element of the third kind of classical proof, is inter-

 

woven in every Pauline message. It is its very warp and woof. The

ethical appeal that is manifested by the Apostle's first epistle is

499

representative of that which is found in every subsequent discourse.
The following lines thus become typical.

For our appeal does not spring from error or uncleanness,

nor is it made with guile; but just as we have been approved by
God to be entrusted with the gosPel, so we Speak, not to please
men, but to please God who tests our hearts. For we never
used either words of flattery, as you know, or a cloak for greed,
as God is witness; nor did we seek glory from man‘. . . though
we might have made demands as the apostles of Christ. But we
were gentle among you, like a nurse taking care of her children.
So, being affectionately desirous of you, we were ready to share
with you not only the gospel of God but also our own selves,
because you had become very dear to us. 1 Thess 2:3-8 RSV

It is not necessary or appropriate to review in detail the analyses

of ethos made in chapter five, but it should be pointed out that the

 

classical elements of competence, virtue, and good-will are present in
abundant measure throughout each of the epistles discussed, as in the
example just cited.

Only deliberate opponents of the Apostle required much convinc-

ing of the competence of this man, who was accused of "turning the

 

world upside down. " One who could silence a mob, almost convert a
Roman governor, win both the aristocratic and the lowly, and raise
up Christian congregations wherever he travelled, bore very evidently
the hallmark of ability. Nevertheless, this element is to be found also
as an essential verbal ingredient of the ethical proof of each epistle.
Paul everywhere prefaces his message with the fact that he is an
Apostle of God, and, ambassador of heaven; and the authoritative note
throughout his discourses is only the corollary of the competence which
he displays in argument.

As for virtue, this also is everywhere evident. Paul nowhere
hesitates to remind his hearers that he never enriched himself at their

expense. He boasts of the fact that he would not accept financial support

0.;“-.
i: e.
U
n

‘Jr’
"P‘.
w‘rrv'
- -

--

A...

——'-—M‘
. .

.fi‘

My”,

1?)th .2 MD 301152.
and) “003‘,

_.. News.
:II‘ um

-. 9.. duo;
Lil! an H .
! Jr“ "D“;

.I . {K ‘( (a

‘ l

‘- Ian 10“ *1

13;)! orflbh‘ .
A I ,4 .

012170;)
.v); Kids 34)?-
.i 1'7““!th '-

F5 J LJ'LtI 91p

J1; 83:13 .9 5432p:
ass-:1 zit! bit I;-

.' 5'; 5:13 10 . - ..

 

500

from the believers although entitled to it. His transparent conduct is
educed in answer to his traducers.

We put no obstacle in any one's way, so that no fault may be
found with our ministry, but as servants of God we commend
ourselves in every way: through great endurance, in afflic-
tions, hardships, calamities, beatings, imprisonments, tumults,
labors, watching, hunger; by purity, knowledge, forbearance,
kindness, the Holy Spirit, genuine love, truthful Speech, and the
power of God; with the weapons of righteousness for the right
hand and for the left; in honor and dishonor, in ill repute and
good repute. We are treated as impostors, and yet are true;

as unknown, and yet well known; as dying, and behold we live;
as punished, and yet not killed; as sorrowful, yet always rejoic-
ing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, and yet
possessing everything. 2 Corinthians 6:3-10 RSV

The Christian counterpart of the Aristotelian goodwill is love.

 

This Paul displayed in abundance, verbally as well as through other forms
of conduct. Those whom he addresses are his "beloved, " his ”little
children, " his "joy and crown, " his "brethren, ” his "very heart. "

He refers to himself as a nurse, a father, a mother, a friend, a brother,
and as one wholly identified with the feelings and experiences of each
believer, "weeping with those that weep" and ”rejoicing with those that
rejoice. ” Thus he declares to one congregation:

I seek not yours, but you: for the children ought not to lay up
for the parents, but the parents for the children. And I will
very gladly Spend and be Spent for you; though the more
abundantly I love you, the less I be loved. 2 Cor 12:14, 15

Such references suggest that it is not difficult to find in Paul
numerous examples of what Kenneth Burke calls “identification. "
The Apostle was well aware that by nature men are at odds with one
another. By linking his destiny with that of every Christian, by throw-
ing a cord of love about every congregation so as to encompass even
the lowliest slave, Paul manifested an empathy that made men not only

trust him, but ready to die for him.

. c
c e C
V I
i \ x c
c . . c
t c O C .\
c . c
-\ y \
. c t x
. i . v c C
_ t .. . y e e C
.~ s
. . C C
_ e c ..
E Ix ; v
e t .
. x _
s .. u C v V
. C
e a c . .
a. c t C
. y
c . v ..
~
. e _ e c c
u C
.
. c .
. . e e
e
\ t i . c
»
\ ) ..
v
\
.
_ .
P C
_
..
. <
c _ c

 

501

In terms of the canon of arrangement, Paul is capable but by
no means flawless. It has been noted that most of his letters follow
a similar pattern of (1) the greeting, (2) the thanksgiving, (3) the
doctrinal portion, (4) the section of practical application, (5) personal
messages, and (6) the farewell. While there are inherent values in
such an arrangement, linking as it does the present with both past
and future, and uniting practice with theory, it has to be recognized
that, particularly in sections three and four, Paul occasionally made
progress by use of the zig-zag method. AS his messages were dic-
tated, his very fertility of thought proved at times an encumbrance.
At times he seems to leave a thought unfinished while indulging in a
lengthy parenthesis. Nevertheless, the more one studies the Paulines,
the closer the relationships between such passages is often found to be.
While formal sequence is frequently lacking, there is present
in each epistle either a logical or a psychological arrangement.
In Galatians, for example, Paul defers his logical presentation of
doctrine until his own authority has been strongly defended by a variety
of arguments. Similarly, in first Corinthians, he was too wise to
attempt to straighten out the backsliding church with reference to
fundamental Christian beliefs until he had first striven to bring them
to an attitude of repentance, humility, and receptivity. In Philemon

was noted a psychological arrangement par excellence wherein the

 

Apostle first strove to mollify the feelings of the slave-owner by a
revelation of affection, and by a disclosure of the perilous plight
resulting from his (the Apostle's) whole-hearted service for Christ.
Only after such a commencement, and even then on the basis of friend-
ship rather than authority, did he tactfully solicit the granting of his
plea. These instances from the epistles are representative of the
competent, though at times formally imperfect, diSposition of the

discour 8 es analyzed.

502

In the chapter on Paul's style, it was pointed out that the basic
requirements of a superior style--sublime living and transcendent
inventive resources-~were characteristic of the Apostle. From such
springs came a distinctive form of utterance which conveyed the
thoughts of the Speaker with striking effectiveness. It is Significant
that the language employed by Paul was not the classical Greek of
contemporary authors but, instead, the vernacular Koiné, Thus the 7
epistles when first written had the same pungency and impact as is

now reflected by such modern translations as Phillips' Letters to

 

Young Churches. The Koiné Greek words used are those, which in the

 

great majority of instances, were universally known. Paul's choices
from among synonyms indicate his endeavor to be both precise and
perSpicuous. The selection of key terms such as Eg_a_p_é_ reveal a
refined sense of propriety which refused to permit the sullying of an
exalted theme by a word with vulgar connotations. Pathetic stress in
the discourses was enhanced by a liberal use of figures, without,
however, approaching the extremes practiced by his contemporaries.
As for composition, Paul in some instances proved defective.
Anacoluthon and ellipses are occasionally found. DeSpite the lessen-
ing of clarity thus occasioned, the overall impression of urgency and
sincerity seemed thereby strengthened in a manner which no formal
correctness of composition could have equalled. Finally, it can be
said that passages such as 1 Corinthians l3; 15:51-55, and 2 Corinthians
6, reveal the height of Paul's stylistic genius, and place his ability
in this regard beyond question.

In chapter seven, Paul's manifestation of ethos is compared with

 

that recommended by recent American preaching theory. It is pointed
out that most homileticians regard preaching as a distinctive form of

oratory characterized by the principle that the preacher is an

503

accredited ambassador of heaven with a message based not on prob-
abilities, but on the infallible premises of revelation. Furthermore,
the preacher, as the representative of the Divine Being, is under
greater obligation than the secular orator to express "truth through
personality" and thus prepare and render his discourses with full
recognition of the fact that preaching is ”both an art and an incarnation. "
From the standpoint of the epistles surveyed, these modern homiletic
concepts seem confirmed. 1 Paul was more than a secular orator.
He was a Spokesman for God. In this fact lies the explanation for the
constant note of authority throughout his addresses. It seems also the
case that the Apostle personally exemplified the virtues he proclaimed,
and the procedures he advocated. If there is one characteristic in
addition to his consecration to Christ that prevails above others, it is
his love for his congregation--the same love that he so aptly portrayed
in 1 Corinthians 13. For that division of oratory lmown as preaching,
the moral is plain. Only the man who is dead to self dare assume the
prophet's mantle.

The succeeding chapter on the relevance of Pauline ethics for
modern communication emphasized that the ethics of each generation

are always based upon a weltanschauung, a world-view. That is to say

 

that conduct is determined by an individual's belief concerning the nature
of his universejflf one discounts the supernatural, and views the

present life purely in terms of mechanistic processes, then one logically
lives according to selfish patterns. On the other hand, one who believes

(

that the Spirit of man is a Spark from the Eternal will act as "ever in
3

his great Taslqnaster's eye. " The tenor of current communication

suggests a dearth of the latter kind of individuals, and the trend of

 

1As pointed out in chapter seven, it seems likely that the modern
concepts of homiletics were drawn in large measure from the writings
of Paul.

1"?

1‘77"

.'W'I

 

 

 

 

504

modern life reveals a crisis that has resulted from this lack. Thus
may be seen the propriety of a new look at Pauline ethics by those
leaders of society who influence the masses through the communi-

cation media.

Conclusions

 

What then should be our conclusions regarding Paul the orator?
What does he have to contribute, if anything, to our modern theories
of rhetoric and communication?

It has already been intimated in the summary that to appraise
Paul by means of the classical canons is to rate him very highly. By
the "methods" test, the Apostle emerges as a skilled artist apparently
doing naturally that which multitudes of others have sought to accomp-
lish by studied techniques. He justifies the rules of classical rhetoric
which rules, as Quintilian, Augustine, Thomas Wilson, and others
have declared "were made first by wisemen and not wisemen made by
rules. " By the ”methods" system of appraisal our orator stands
above and beyond any other recorded Speaker for over a millenium of
the Christian era.

If immediate ”reSponse is the key to oratory" and we measure

 

the Apostle by this test, the verdict is the same. While it is not
possible to trace in every case the immediate results of a particular
message from the Apostle, those cases where it _i_s_possible so to do
testify of his success. Internal evidence and tradition attest the
positive results of 1 Thessalonians, 1 Corinthians, Philippians, and
Philemon.

It has been suggested by rhetorical critics that:

the societal point of view provides . . . the proper approach to
the study of effectiveness. According to this conception, the
success of oratory must be evaluated in terms, not of the Speaker

l
.
. C .
. . c
. e . .
g L
_ _ l c
.
. e e
.
e a . c
. L c
e C
0‘ ea \
C .
e i .
C c
g n
a -\
. a
. .c
C e
. C
.
e . c . c
e C c
a . t .
a
I c
\ s

 

505

alone, but of the larger social sphere within which he functions.
Thus the Speech is studied in its possible relation to social

change. This is a complex consideration necessitating a recog-
nition of such factors as attitudes towards a change--conservatism,
liberalism, and the like--the influence of tradition, and the

power of the coercive authorities in the state. 1

If then we consider the Apostle's oratory in this larger framework,
the evidence is once more suggestive of his effectiveness. While the
downfall of paganism and the official acceptance of Christianity in the
fourth century cannot, on several counts, be entirely attributed to Paul,
neither is it easy to conceive of such events as having tranSpired with-
out his influence. One fact seems undeniable, and that is that the
Western world is the result of the fusion of Christianity and Classicism,
and this fusion was rendered possible through the energy, consecration,
and skill of one who was an effective orator.

It is a historical fact that European civilization received
its chief content and strongest impulses from the ancient world.
It is another historical fact that the most important legacies
of the ancient world are those usually described as the Judaeo-
Christian and the Greco-Roman traditions. . . . only by the
combination of the two trends--a combination which greatly
varied in character throughout the ages--was the continuity of
EurOpean civilization guaranteed. Whatever section of its
history we may try to investigate, we shall always find evidence
of the heritage of Moses and the Prophets, and Jesus and the
Christian Church on the one hand, and on the other, of Greek
and Roman life, thought and belief, literature and art. 2

The union here described between the two formative traditions of
Christianity and the Greco-Roman Classical tradition was made

possible by the Missionary to the Gentiles.

 

lThonssen and Baird, pp. 454-455.

zVictor Ehrenberg, Aspects of the Ancient World (New York:
William Salloch, 1946), p. 240.

 

 

506

Second only to the ”methods" test first mentioned , we would
place that prOposed by John Morley. He suggests that not merely
the immediate, but the long range results are important. "IS not the
highest object of our search in a study of the career of a conspicuous
man an estimate of his contributions to the cause of the collective
progress of mankind?”1 Here is the test of service to, rather than
mere influence upon, society as a guide to oratorical merit. How
does Paul rank if considered by this standard? Our particular biases
will determine our answer. If, however, we accept as an ethic that
life is sacred and that whatever contributes to its long-range preserva-
tion is a good, then the influence of Paul looms large. As the promul-
gator of virtues which have ever acted as a preserving salt in society,
he has had no equal among men. The influence of 1 Corinthians 13
alone has pr‘obably transcended by far the united best of all pagan
oratory. Most reform movements, including the Methodist revival of
the 18th century and the humanitarian enterprises of the nineteenth
century, drew strength and inspiration from the ancient discourses of
the Apostle to the Gentiles.

This test with reference to service to society has vital impinge-
ments upon the field of rhetoric and public address. Today the world
seems imperilled by the potent prOpaganda of Communism, a propa-
ganda which is empowered by certain rhetorical methods. An objective
consideration of this type of oratory discloses that frequently its

modus operandi has much in common with some aSpects revealed by a

 

superficial view of classical rhetoric. Donald Bryant suggests that
reference to any Speech handbook reveals the affinity between the

methods of propaganda and the typical methods of the rhetoric of public

 

1Thonssen and Baird, p. 459.

507

1 Of course he hastens to add that the former lacks the

address.
philosophic outlook which belongs to the classicalviewpoint. "Most
of the major prOpaganda techniques are long-known rhetorical tech-
niques gone wrong, " whereas oratory at its best fulfills the highest
standards of morality and intellect. In other words, it is the ethical
and intellectual emphases of the classical position which distinguish
it from modern, unscrupulous, and highly emotive propaganda.

It is this point which is stressed by Barnet Baskerville in his

review of Luthin's American DemagogueS--Twentieth Century.

 

The demagogue, says Dr. Luthin, is "a politician skilled in
oratory, . . ."A politician skilled in oratory. These men who
individually and collectively constitute a national disgrace were
effective public Speakers. They analyzed their audiences; they
were masters of psychological and rhetorical techniques; they
got results. Some, like Talmadge and Long, were outstanding
school-boy orators. This should be a sobering thought to those
of our profession who still insist upon making success the prime
criterion of rhetorical excellence, and who disclaiming reSpons-
ibility for the way in which techniques are to be employed,
strive merely to impart to their students techniques which
”work!‘. Such a philosophy can only provide another crop of
candidates for such a rogues' gallery of unprincipled masters

of the masses as Luthin presents in this book?‘ [emphasis his]

 

With this warning in mind we recall that the record of the
Hellenistic era is that neither the Greeks nor the Romans possessed
enough ethical ballast to provide equipoise for their intellectual
endeavors. The hollow oratory of the Second SoPhistic was indeed a
mirror of the age. Such a civilization inevitably collapsed, and
analysts of our times, such as Sorokin, suggest we live at the close

of a similar era, facing the threat of a similar catastrophe.

 

1Donald C. Bryant, "Rhetoric: Its Functions and Its Sc0pe, "
Quarterly-Journal of Speech XXXIX (December, 1953), p. 417.

 

zBarnet Baskerville, "Book Reviews, " Quarterly Journal of
Speech, XLI (August, 1955), p. 180.

 

/

 

 

I
\
.
. u
e .r I
.1 .
c ..
c . .
c “\ .
1 c
e . . _ u a
s \l
s u
C
t x . I
c \
c .
t e
. .I
. c
_ ...
_ x c c
5.
x V I
. e e __ l
. c
t C
a x
e
O
_ ~
I
c _
II
1 u
. r _ c
c
u _
\
_
s e
t
\. I
c L
.
t

-O

 

508

The historian Toynbee has expressed himself in the following grave
manner.

The secular philosophy on which most Westerns have
been living, in practice, for the last 250 years is proving to
be an inadequate guide in the new chapter of history into which
we are now moving. If we are to keep our feet on the path of
life in this next stage of our journey, we must be prepared to
reorient our spiritual outlook, as actively as our forefathers
acted when they put themselves through the last great Spiritual
revolution in the West at the close of the seventeenth century.

This belief in science (to which our forefathers committed
themselves in the late seventeenth century) has been the guiding
inSpiration of the West down to our own day, until at last its
limitations and its weaknesses have been exposed as an ironical
consequence of its dazzling success.

The mastery of physical nature which this science has
conferred on its practitioners is not just a feat of technological
magic. Western technology and science originated as by-products
of Western moral virtues, and they could never have come to
fruition if these virtues had not begotten them. They are outward
visible signs of inward spiritual graces: a devotion to truth that
is prepared to follow an argument honestly, wherever it may
lead; an ideal of integrity in workrnanship; and, perhaps above
all, a feeling of respect and charity for one's momentary
opponent. . . .

In our time, science has placed in human hands the power
to destroy life on earth. . . . It has made the practical conse-
quences of human conduct immensely more serious than they
have been in the past . . . . two spiritual experiences are
challenging us today. The first is, as we have seen, the Spiritual
requirement of a higher level of conduct that is being set us by the
new heightening of our material power. The second is a demand

upon us to make up our minds about our own fundamental beliefs;
1

i

If Christianity of the Pauline type does not contain the suggested
ethical blueprint required to regenerate humanity, such a blueprint is

probably nowhere available. We would suggest that the oratory of

 

1Cited by Rupert L. Cortright and George L. Hinds, Creative
Discussion (New York: The Macmillan Co. , 1959), p. 291.

 

 

.
. n s
. i c . C x
_ .
a a V L
c i . . .
i c e \
a
.
a C L a a s
. x _
. c \ e .
e x . _ i . g
.
a e ‘ a . s C
_ m a
_ .e _
e V \
_ e e .
\ ~ _
‘ \
O .
.
_ e a
_ .
s. v
c
e C e
c . x . _
_
c \I
t . ..
c
c c
x ..
c _. c . .
i . t
‘
a L
I: 7‘ .
I I.
5 ~ ~
»
u.
. .
»
.
c
r

 

509

Paul, which was responsible for the rescue from moral Shipwreck
of thousands of lives during a degenerate age, contains principles
and concepts which could empower reSponSible Speakers today.

For instance, every human being as one redeemed by Christ, was of
worth in Paul's eyes. Such a concept, if grasped by the masses of
the twentieth century, would prevent the growth of a totalitarian
society and call for the universal extension of democracy. Paul

believed in the power of love rather than the love of power, and his

 

 

personal examplification of this virtue suggests that herein lies a
dynamic that could transform and subsequently safeguard mankind.
This same Speaker employed emotion as a stimulus to the intellect
rather than as a short-circuiting agency. Such an example followed
today would purge both advertising and politics. For these reasons
we would suggest that the fullest application of Morley's proposition
to the work of Paul will be possible only when and if humanitysurvives
what Sorokin calls "the crisis of our age, " inasmuch as that survival
seems dependent upon the application of the Christian ethic.

To these conclusions regarding the merit of this ancient orator
should be added others with reference to possible contributions to
modern methodology in rhetoric and communication. As intimated
above in the discussion of the Morley prOposition regarding service to
society, Paul's chief contribution to rhetoric lies in his examplification

of the Quintilian dictum that an orator is "a good man skilled in

 

Speaking. ” The discovery of new principles of truth is comparatively

 

rare. Our great need seems to be the stimulus from new examples to
believe and follow the trite but truthful platitudes of long ago.

Few men, if any, have spoken as affectively as Paul, because

 

few have lived as sublimely. He helped to ennoble the world because

 

 

his own life was first ennobled. We are reminded of Emerson's

 

 

II J
_ c
a
_
. c .
. . .
a
i .
_
. . . _
. . c c
. c
. .
c . I
L . .
h \
a . u c L
c c
a
a _ s
._ c
c c
c ... c i
. c h
c e
c c
a a
C C .
C C .
c c c
C , C
.
C
_

 

 

510

declaration that in the final analysis the question which history will
ask concerning each “great” man iS--”Did he take the part of great
principles, the side of humanity and justice, or the side of abuse,
and oppression, and chaos?" Oratorical ”mastery to Emerson was
more than virtuosity. Mastery was achieved because of an inner
rightness. 'A tone of authority cannot be taken without truths of
authority. It is impossible to mimmick it . . . it proceeds directly
from the perception of principles.”1

In one of his essays, after discussing the importance to
the speaker of voice, language, and manner, he (Emerson)
adds the inevitable and all-important proviso: "But I say,
provided your cause is really honest. There is always the
previous question: How came you on that side: your argument
is ingenious, your language copious, your illustrations brilliant,
but your major prOposition palpably absurd. Will you establish
a lie? You area very elegant writer, but you can't write up
what gravitates down. "7‘

 

Since Plato wrote the Phaedrus, the best of men have acknowledged

 

this principle that the chief requirements for communication are virtue
and knowledge (including both the knowledge of truth and of method).

Yet the verdict of history is that these two essentials have been ade-
quately combined only on comparatively rare occasions. Generally it
has been at a time of national collapse or the end of an era that this
emphasis upon ethical and informed communication has been reiterated.
An example of this is to be seen in the criticisms of ”the great unknown"
who used the pseudonym of Longinus during the era of the Second

Sophistic . He inquires

 

1Baskerville, ”Emerson as a Critic of Oratory, " Southern Speech
Journal, Vol. XVIII (March, 1953), pp. 150-162.

 

21bid.

 

 

511

. . why it is that, while there is today no dearth of men who
are persuasive, interested in public affairs, shrewd, skillful,
and certainly delightful Speakers, our age so very rarely
produces men of outstanding genius. A world-wide sterility of
utterance has come upon our life. 1

The cause prOposed to this problem is that men are petty and
ignoble because of their engrossment in the material things of life.
Because few men lead sublime lives, therefore few orators attain to

the heights of sublimity.

This writer expresses the philosophy that man was made for
communion with realms beyond the visible and the sensuous.

. . . nature judged man to be no lowly or ignoble creature when
she brought us into this life and into the whole universe as into

a great celebration, to be Spectators of her whole performance
and most ambitious actors. She implanted at once into our souls
an invincible love for all that is great and more divine than our-
selves. That is why the whole universe gives insufficient scope
to man's power of contemplation and reflection, but his thoughts
often pass beyond the boundaries of the surrounding world. Any-
one who looks at life in all its aSpectS will see how far the remark-
able, the great, and the beautiful predominate in all things, and
he will soon understand to what end we have been born. 7‘

In strong contrast to such an ideal the closing words of On the
Sublime mourn over the fact that men of that generation were serving
''the desires which surely rule our present world like an army of
occupation and [which] drive absolutely everything before them. "

We are the slaves of money, which is an insatiable
disease in us all, and also the slaves of pleasure; these two
violate our lives and our persons. The love of gold is a
disease which shrinks a man, and the love of pleasure is
ignoble. . . . Little by little the corruption of life's circle
is completed; great qualities of soul wither, waste away, and

 

lLonginus (?), On Great Writing (On the Sublime) trans. by
M. A. Grube (New York: The Liberal Arts Press, 1957), 44.

21bid., 35.

 

 

512

are no longer esteemed; and men come to admire what is
mortal within them, for they have neglected the growth of the
immortal.

. . . the worst bane of all those born now is the indif-
ference in which, with rare exceptions, all of us live, never
laboringor undertaking anything for its own sake, but only
for praise or pleasure, never for any benefit worthy of honor
or emulation. 1

Three centuries after “Longinus, ” Augustine made a similar
plea as the thunder of Rome's fall echoed in his ears. He also affirmed
that it was insufficient merely to master the techniques of public Speak-
ing. ". . . in causing his words to be persuasive, the life? of a speaker

has greater influence than any sublimity of eloquence, no matter how

great it may be. "2

And now in the twentieth century, as men contemplate the possible
end of all things because man's moral progress has not matched his
inventive genius, discerning observers plead anew for the ethical
regeneration of mankind as the only way to survival, and indeed as the
only excuse for existence.

. . . it is imperative that ethics, which deals with ends and
the relative values of what is achieved, be reunited with the
political art. Rhetoric, as the intermediary between the will
to action and the achievement of the result, must accordingly
be conceived as both a political and an ethical instrument.
This is another way of saying, perhaps, that there must be a
moral principle supporting and guiding the liberal tradition.
While there has been some diSposition to resist the inclusion
of such a principle in the scheme of learning--a circumstance
resulting from our virtual deification of the so-called scientific
spirit and method--its return as an active force in the field of
knowledge is necessary. A sustained faith in democracy itself
depends upon it.

 

 

lIbid. , 44

ZAugustine, Christian Instruction, IV. 27.

 

1...! .I.: .WO‘T.

-. ..‘1 1 C‘NI‘..‘ I!
.i .n . ..x. . . I ..t 'Jl’ -..tl‘v.
. ....)‘614‘...\Aii(i«;:f- . .19.)... . .I. . -
. . . J. . _.. . . n
..-i.‘ I. 0. . ... . .

 

513

So closely connected with the concept of a union of
politics and rhetoric that it would be folly to dissociate them,
is the wisdom of linking rhetoric with ethics. This is no new
idea. The ancients recognized the necessity of doing precisely
this. If man iS a political anirnal'; if he uses Speech to achieve
his ends in deliberative Situations, he also needs a guiding ethic,
a set of principles which will enable him to judge the right from
the wrong and to govern his conduct by appeal to moral standards.

This is simply another way of saying that rhetoric is to
be used to give effectiveness to truth. .6 . .

The issue is one involving the reconciliation of the instru-
mental means of acquiring reSponses from hearers with the
ethical considerations relative to the character of the desired
ends. It has-been said that "the consciousness of end must be
more than merely intellectual. "1

This matter does not belong to the periphery of rhetoric. Instead it
can be said truly that

the central issue in modern Speech education lies in the area of
the ethics of rhetoric. The conception of rhetoric as simply a
bag of tricks has been denied all the way from Plato's distrust

of the SOphists to the modern distrust of Dale Carnegie. Yet the
answer lies not in arguing that we must teach Speech as an "art, "
but in recognizing that the real difference between a defensible
rhetoric and a modern sophistry can be delineated only through

a fundamentally ethical criticism of the value-action connections
which make up the real persuasion of a speech. Like the creative
theorist in economics or political science, we can no longer leave
ethics to the philosophy department.2 (emphasis ours)

 

 

 

 

Many speech critics have asserted that "there is no honest

n3

rhetoric without a preceding dialectic. The exemplification of an

adequate value-system should be required of a public Speaker.

 

lThonssen and Baird, pp. 467,470-471.
zCroft,

3Plato in the Phaedrus urged the same procedure of initial dia-
lectic. Inasmuch as dialectic itself is based upon philosophical con-
cepts of reality and truth, the inevitable relationship between honest
rhetoric and truth should be readily perceivable.

 

 

514

. . . those who have been adjudged by literary standards to
be the great novelists have not always adhered to conventional
morality, and most literary critics would maintain that the
personal morals of the artist are not a factor to be considered
in judging the excellence of his work. However true this may
be of belles-lettres, it is not necessarily applicable to the
evaluation of oratory. A novel is a work of fine art, written
primarily to be enjoyed for its own sake. A Speech is an instru-
ment for moving men's minds and influencing men's actions.
As such, it cannot be amoral; it cannot escape an ethical
compulsion. It must be remembered also that a Speech is not
merely a written document, but a dynamic process, in which
the speaker as a person is inescapably involved. It does not
seem irrelevant, therefore, to attempt to discover . .. . what
the Speaker "stands for" and to examine the ultimate conse-
quences of the course he advocates.

. . . there are times when the critic must Speak out, lest he
place himself in the ridiculous position of lauding the effective
techniques of the latest demagogue and letting the matter stand,
without pointing out the fatal flaws which render his virtuosity
hollow and vicious. And though we lack certainty as to what is
"true" or ”good" in the particular case, we are not completely
without touchstones for our judgments. However much we some-
times differ as to means, we can agree on certain fundamental
ends. We believe in freedom; we believe in the sacredness of
the human personality; we believe in the superiority of love,
tolerance, and justice to hatred, bigotry and injustice. The
suggestion is ventured, therefore, that we may find it wise and
socially useful to supplement out criticism of a speaker's
organization, style, delivery, proofs, etc. , with Emerson's
persistent inquiry: "Are you for man and for the good of man;

or are you for the hurt and harm of man? " In these days when
the consequences of acting according to our leaders' spoken
exhortations may be either ultimate triumph or ultimate dis-
aster for mankind, it is at least a possibility worth considering. I

The above writers, Baskerville, Weaver, Croft, Thonssen and

Baird, are not professing to convey new information in these statements.

 

lBaskerville, "Emerson as a Critic of Oratory" Southern Speech
Journal, Vol. XVIII (March, 1953), pp. 150-162.

 

515

Each is merely echoing in his own way words which were penned more
than 2000 years ago, namely:

It is not true, as some writers on the art maintain, that the
probity of the speaker contributes nothing to his persuasiveness;
on the contrary, we might almost affirm that his character is
the most potent of all the means to persuasion. 1

Aristotle declares what he believes _i_s_ the case, while the later
writers are affirming what they believe ought always to be the case.

Each of these quotations applies almost as strongly to the entire
field of communication. The art of Spreading ideas is far more ques-
tionable as to its ethics than as regards its techniques. In view of
the fact that the average American now Spends from three to Six hours
a day with mass communication, the urgency of making such an involve-
ment profitable for society is obvious. Just as obviously, by "profitable
to society" is not intended the mere material advancement which at
this present time seems to augur more bane than blessing. If "talk"
is to prevail over "take, " and ballots over bullets, men must some-
how be led to prize virtue above vanity and vice, and service rather
than selfishness. Otherwise, our creed may become, "I believe in one
uranium atom, divisible, with oblivion for all. "3 ‘

DeSpite the fact that our generation seems to have an inferiority
complex regarding the culture of the soul, the magnitude of the present
world-crisis Should cause us to question the current fashionable
scepticism concerning the "old-fashioned" virtues. It may yet be found
that the ancient absolutes recommended and practiced by Paul in his
oratory are more relevant to our needs than the clever but too-often

barren counsels of our modern communicators.

 

lAristotle, The Rhetoric, 1:2.

 

zReuben Gustavson, cited by W. Norwood Brigance, "1946 Year
of Decision, " Quarterly Journal of Speech, Vol. XXXIII (April, 1947),
p. 132.

 

ITI’V'V'"V

 

516

Possibly the Apostle to the Gentiles would say to us as he did
to our European forefathers:

Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true,
whatsoever things are honest,
whatsoever things are just,
whatsoever things are pure,
whatsoever things are lovely,
whatsoever things are of good report;
if there be any virtue,
and if there be any praise,

THINK ON THESE THINGS. . .
and the God of peace shall be with you.

Philippians 4: 8 , 9

 

APPENDIX

517

CONCLUSIONS '"

It was the announced purpose of this study to investigate
American Protestant literature in preaching, from 1870 to 1950:

(1) To determine the role and importance assigned to the

 

Aristotelian concept of m
(2) To determine whether or not in this body of literature
the Aristotelian conception is significantly modified by the
distinctive religious premises and purposes underlying
preaching;
(3) and to report the nature and significance of such utilization
or modifications of the concept.
The study was limited to books on preaching written by AIneri-
can Protestants in the period 1870-1950; the rationale of Aristotelian
rhetoric was adopted as a means of organizing and reporting the data;

the Aristotelian definition of ethos was broadened for purposes of

 

research to include "any effects of the person of the Speaker upon the
bearer"; and an important principle of methodology in both research

and report has been the search for motifs: ”Those factors in virtue

 

of which a particular outlook or system possesses its own peculiar
character as distinct from all others". 1

The purpose of this attempt to discover "the real motive force"
of each system has been to clarify and explain similarities and dif-
ferences between the two systems of ethical proof as adequately as

possible.

1Ny’gren, op: c_i_t_., Vol. 1, Part 1, p. vii.

>'
‘This is the final chapter of John J. Rudin's dissertation "The
Concept of Ethos in Late American Preaching. "

518

.. c
u .—
,, o m
) x’ \1 .
x
( ( ( I ~ v
. _ c .v\
. _
_ a. . V
c a c c
c . c L .. c
c . .. c
C L
. c .
. c . a a .
. i c .
t. o . .
y
c c . c r e . c ._ . .
i _ .. . ..
_ v ~ ~
~ .
. c c _ u c” e
_r c
.
. . c g a o v
c a
_ . _ .. _
a a y
c .
c
c i
_ . a
V
r o
. c
A

|.P ‘

. 9.. .
A! .lv‘.{.vl\ u a,»

. 1‘0\ 5 0%»: ‘1"... ..IDH...:

‘ 075‘-

m V \JIQ .
"Eitg'I‘ fl! l
YVJvD I a .
I I t l -IV... 1 1‘0 ‘t'n‘ll‘l‘l‘

 

I. 5’ I?!

519

Chapters have been devoted to reporting the views of the writers
on preaching concerning:
(1) the nature and function of preaching and of authority;

(2) the nature and function of ethos in preaching;

 

(3) the sources of ethos in the two rhetorical systems;

 

(4) the nature and function of adaptation to the audience; and
(5) the role of the canons of rhetoric in the develOpment and

evincing of ethos .

 

This chapter will report the nature of the writings investigated;

it will summarize the distinctive motifs of the two systems; and will

 

assess the significance of the similarities and differences revealed by
this study.

I. The Characteristics of the Literature

 

The number of writers who treat ethical proof is rather small.
Of the approximately 300 volumes in the bibliography, approximately
100 contain references to the effect of the person of the preacher upon
the hearer. Of these approximately 75 contain reasonably thorough
treatment of this topic. The remainder of approximately 25 are brief
allusions.

All of the approximately 60 authors who treat personal proof in
some detail also discuss such subject-matter topics as the importance
of preaching, the use of the Bible, the art of illustration, or other

standard topoi.

 

Almost all those who discuss delivery refer at least briefly to
the personal proof of the preacher.

The more than 200 volumes which do not treat the ethos of the

 

preacher, are in most cases, devoted to topics other than the art of
preaching. The theological bases of preaching, the importance of

preaching as a Christian institution, the use of the Bible in preaching,

520

the type of preaching suitable for our day, the history of preaching,
are topics represented.

Thus it may be said that the views of ethos reported in this

 

study represent a comparatively small proportion of the literature
on preaching of the period.

The majority of writers do not deny the importance or validity
of personal proof: they ignore it. This is attributable in part to the
subject-centeredness typical of the literature, which leads to com-
parative neglect of all tOpics related to the audience.

A second phenomenon is related to the first. No writer develops

a rhetoric of preaching in which the Aristotelian ethos-concept is

 

fully and systematically develOped.
A number of the writers prior to 1910 refer to the concept, and
several describe the Aristotelian qualities, but no writer applies the

principle throughout the volume. Ethos is not viewed as related to the

 

canons of rhetoric, audience-adaptation is neglected entirely or con-
sidered to be a means of adjusting the content of the sermon to the
listener for clarity or for helpful ministry to his needs. The relation
of Speaker to subject is developed; the Speaker-listener relationship is
neglected by many.

Writers since approximately 1910 reveal little or no first-hand
acquaintance with classical rhetoric.

Writers throughout the period incline toward concreteness and
detail regarding the religious significance of the character of the
preacher; they view character as a religious obligation; but they write
only briefly, and in general terms, concerning the persuasive function
of the preacher's ethos.

In a third characteristic there is practical unanimity among the

writers. They consider the personal proof‘of the preacher to be a

 

function of his personality as well as of his character.

 

 

521‘

Thus such elements of personality as health, vitality, appearance,

 

 

 

manner, and delivery skills are viewed as reinforcing the effect of

 

character-attributes. This is commonly expressed in Phillips Brooks?

 

phrase: "Truth through personality", which is quoted by many later
writers.

In a closely related emphasis the writers also agree. All view
the preacher's qualities of ethos in a religious context, as aspects of
his relation to God and to Jesus Christ, as religious obligations and
possessions. ”Preaching is both an art and an incarnation. "

As a consequence of this view, several distinctively Christian
qualities are regarded as vital. These include p_i_et_y, humility, _qu_,

reSpect for persons, and love. ”The man must incarnate his Master. "

 

Finally, these characteristics of the literature must be seen
as manifestations of a yet more fundamental viewpoint, the primary
motif which distinguishes preaching from Aristotelian rhetoric, and
which gives it its "real motive force".

Preaching receives ”its own peculiar character as distinct from
all others", in the Opinion of the writers, because it is prophetic
utterance, because the preacher is a called and commissioned messenger
of God, invested with authority, who proclaims a Word not his own.
”The preacher is a channel, not a source. "

In the light of this basic premise, the foregoing characteristics of
the literature are seen to be aSpects of a distinctive Godward orien-
tation and a unique message-consciousness which distinguish preaching
from Aristotelian rhetoric.

This fundamental motif likewise causes significant modifications
of the Aristotelian ethos-concept.

The following summary-comparison of the two rhetorical systems

reviews the fundamental premises and consequent theories of ethos

 

which have been reported in earlier chapters.

c _
a
_ x
s _
c
l . .
x x y
. _ c c c
c c c
C ..
c
c .
. c o
\ ~ ;
c
_.
~
_
c .
_ 7‘ V
c . c
. ~ ~
\ s l
~
~ ~
c

 

522

II. The Distinctive Function of Character and Personality in Preaching

 

 

 

THE FUNCTION OF ETHOS IN ARISTOTELIAN RHETORIC

I. The Nature and Function of Rhetoric

 

A. Tradition, setting, subjects, and audience of Aristotelian rhetoric
are secular, and endS--Expediency, Justice and Honor-~are
determined by the three speech-occasions.

B. No reference to religious Speaking. Public functions of religion
performed by Greek drama and temples.

C. Rhetoric is pOpular, does not deal with absolute or final truth,
has no source of absolute authority, and is limited to the realm of
probabilitie S .

D. Means of persuasion common to all three types of Speech are
enthymemes and examples. Thus the prMary emphasis is upon
arguments (proofs).

E. The deliberation and choices of Speaker and listener have reference
to means, rather than to ends, and choices reveal ethos.

 

F. This secular, proof-centered, democratic conception of setting,
means, and ends produces the motif of rhetoric: ”Discover the
available means of persuasion, and persuade through arguments

(proof). "

 

II. The Modes of Proof

 

A. The available means of persuasion are artistic and inartistic proofs.

Inartistic proofs are of less interest, because they already exist,
are not invented by the Speaker. Artistic proofs are the product of
proper method.

 

B. There are three modes of proof:

Logos Ethos Pathos
Logical argument, The effect on listener Affects in hearer
as it demonstrates or of the person or Speaker concerning matters
appears to demonstrate other than speaker.

Logos is principal mode; ethos and pathos are subsidiary but important.
All three are proofs, and are effectuated through argument.

523

III. The Qualities of Ethos

 

The three qualities of ethos are

Practical Wisdom Virtue Goodwill

 

 

Practical wisdom and virtue are evinced by arguments from topoi of

the praiseworthy, including intellectual and moral virtues: Practical
Wisdom, Intellectual Wisdom, Liberality, Justice, Courage, Temperance,
Magnanimity, Magnifjicence, and Gentleness.

 

Goodwill is evinced by arguments drawn from the topoi of friendship,
which is treated as emotion of love (liking) and friendship.

Several of minor social virtues of Ethics are included, as well as several
non-moral factors.

IV. The Sources of the Qualities of Ethos

 

A. The norms of the virtues are utility and benefits to the hearer, and
popular morality.

The norms of goodwill are utility, congeniality and popular esteem.

 

Thus, the primary emphasis is the effect upon the audience, as judged
by the audience.

B. Ethos is limited to the time of the Speech-act, thus eliminating the
effects of prior acquaintance and reputation.

C. The conception of ethos is a definitive but limited and partial
emphasis, primarily upon Character. Although non-moral factors
are included, such aspects of personality as attitudes, mood,
empathy, health, are not included.

 

 

 

V. The Communication of Ethos

 

Ethos is manifested through Thought in Arguments.

The Speaker's qualities of ethos, eSpecially moral purpose, are revealed
through his thought (dianoia) in the arguments of the Speech. Since
choices reveal ethos, his choices thus revealed are to be those appro-
priate to a man of competence, virtue, and goodwill.

 

 

524

Such Choices are Conditioned by

A. The ends of the three types of Speech, Expediency, Justice, Honor,
which are constants. The ends being constants, speaker and
listener deliberate only about the means.

B. The ethe (customs, preferences, choices, norms) of audience,

which are affected by hearer's age, form of government, fortune,
wealth, power.

 

Such choices of the Speaker are also conditioned by

C. The desirability of the Speaker employing objective ethos (dramatic
characterization). The Speaker's ethos is enhanced when the traits
of persons quoted and described in his Speech conform to the traits
of actual persons, as conditioned by age, sex, nationality, moral
character, education, pursuits. '

D. The canons of rhetoric are utilized by the Speaker in the evincing
of ethos.

 

 

Invention is of most importance; arrangement, style, and delivery
aid in effectuating arguments. Delivery is minimized. All but
invention are concessions to "the sorry nature of an audience".

By making arguments clever and seemingly sincere and artless,
they aid in the evincing of persuasive ethos. Memory is not treated.

 

 

THE FUNCTION OF CHARACTER AND PERSONALITY IN
PREACHING

I. The Nature and Function of Preaching

A. Influenced by the Old and New Testaments, the tradition, subject
matter, setting, and ends of preaching, are religious. Ends
determined by occasion and audience, and also by purpose of God
and authority of GosPel tradition.

B. Religious Speaking is the chief and only type envisaged, and preaching
is pr0phecy, witness of religious exPerience, and worship.

C. Preaching is pOpular, but the source and ground of authority is God,
who supplies the message, calls and empowers the pr0phet--
ambassador, and enables him to proclaim with authority. Subject-
matter and ends are viewed as concerned with ultimate reality.

 

“9321.!“

r

..Ju.&:

 

525

D. Preaching lacks this strong emphasis upon proofs and logic.
Rather, the emphasis is upon content and proclamation of an

authoritative Gospel, with exposition of the Word and tradition
an important method.

E. No doctrine of choice as a revelation of character, but the religious

choices of Speaker and hearer are not limited to means. Rather,
the ends of life and conduct are of utmost importance.

F. This religious, authoritarian conception of setting, means, and ends

produces the motif of Christian preaching: "Proclaim the Word
with authority. "

II. The Modes of Proof
A. No mention of available means of persuasion, or of proofs.

The "given" nature of the Gospel, Bible, Word, and message favor

inartistic proofs, already existing, ready for use by the Speaker,
revealed to him. This discourages a method-emphasis.

B. Christian rhetoric is not formally subdivided into three modes of
proof, although there are emphasis upon content, and effect of the
person of the Speaker, and the emotional responses of the auditor.
The reSpective functions are not clearly differentiated.

III. The Qualities of Character and Personality

No sharp tripartite division, and a greater number of qualities, which,

with significant additions, roughly approximate Competence, Virtue,
and Goodwill.

 

These qualities are related to the Aristotelian Competence:

 

Intelligence, education, self-discipline, expertness in the grace of God,

objectivity, sense of humor, health, vitality, appearance, manner,
Speech-skills.

These qualities are related to the Aristotelian Virtue:

Piety, sincerity, integrity, humility, naturalness, lack of self-
consciousness, enthusiasm, courage, perseverance.

526

These qualities are related to the Aristotelian Goodwill:

 

Winsomeness, joy, cheerfulness, patience, courtesy, respect of
persons, friendliness, sympathy, love.

IV. The Sources of the Qualities of Personality and Character

 

A. A religious norm dictates nature of qualities and their possession.
Preacher is obligated religiously and professionally to possess
Christlike qualities consonant with the GOSpel he proclaims.
"Preaching is both an art and an incarnation. "

Effect upon audience of qualities is a secondary emphasis.

B. Importance and effect of person of preacher are not limited to the
sermon. His pastoral relations and leadership of public worship
are viewed as significant corollaries of preaching.

C. The person of the preacher is viewed in a broader, less definitive
manner, with important emphasis upon personality as well as
character, and inclusion of attitudes and non-moral factors not
treated by Aristotle.

 

 

V. The Communication of Personality and Character

 

Preaching is "truth through per sonality","an"art and an incarnation. ”
The preacher must possess Christian qualities, which will be revealed
unconsciously as he Speaks.

The truth, Spoken by "the whole man to whole man", will minister to
human needs and will persuade.

No doctrine of character revealed through choices. The Preacher does
not consciously seek to reveal his own character.

A. No cognates of the three types of Speech and the three ends. The
speaker and hearer are not limited to deliberation about means.
Rather, the ends and objects of life and action are of utmost im-
portance, and are viewed as relating to eternal life, to reward and
penalty. ‘

B. Adaptation to the ethe of listeners is not developed. Rather, the
subject-centered-message discourages adaptation to the preferences
of the audience.

 

527

Adaptation is primarily of details of message to comprehension of
audience, in order to minister to religious needs and to persuade.
Acceptance of preacher by hearer aided by helpfulness of message
and his evident love for the hearer. He will be tactful in treating
"unpalatable truths ".

Since qualities of character and personality are possessed, ethos
and adaptation are not explicitly related. Persuasion viewed as
"making truth effective", and as "truth through personality", rather
than as evincing ethos.

C. No objective ethos.

D. The canons of rhetoric are not explicitly regarded as related to
the evincing of‘persuasive ethos.

Earlier writers utilize canons in organization of books; later writers
do not. Some writers throughout period refer to persuasiveness of
matter and manner. Some are contributing to "the free interplay of
personalities".

Accuracy, integrity in employment of illustrative materials, health,
vitality, piety, sincerity, enthusiasm, interest in persons, patience,
good-nature, and love are qualities most commonly cited as persua-
Sive when revealed through matter and manner of Speaker.

III. Significance of Study

 

A. The Significance of the Method Employed

 

The Author regards the value of the findings of this study as due

in part to the method employed. By utilizing the Aristotelian rationale

 

of rhetoric and of ethos, a functional emphasis was imparted to research,
and report, and a detailed and valid norm was provided against which to
compare and contrast Christian preaching.

This definiteness of rationale was made adaptable by the attempt

 

to probe beneath the details of the rhetorical systems to the motifs--

"the real motive forces"--which create the unique outlook of each system.

528

By virtue of this method it has been possible to gather data,
to report them, and to interpret them systematically and sympathetic-

ally.

B. The Significance of Fundamental Motifs

 

The reported conceptions of preaching as a unique form of public
address are regarded as Significant, because they reveal a basic
orientation fundamentally different from that of Aristotle, and it is the
fundamental orientation of each rhetorical system which dictates more
explicit details.

Thus the secular, democratic, audience-oriented rhetoric of
Aristotle enunciates the fundamental motif: "Discover and utilize
the available means of persuasion. " In contrast, the religious, authori-
tarian, Word-centered message-motif of preaching is: "Proclaim the
Word with authority. "

This difference in basic premises, recognized by implication in
such cognate studies as that by Casteel, causes the significant modifi-

cations of the ethos-concept reported in this study.

C. The Significance of the Nature and Role of Ethos

 

The findings of this study regarding the nature and function of
ethos in preaching are of significance as they reveal important modifi-
cations of the Aristotelian concept.

The Aristotelian ethos appears as a narrow character-emphasis,

 

fundamentally grounded in utility and benefits, and emphasizing those

qualities persuasive in the Speech-situations of Athens: Intellectual

 

Competence, Virtue, and Goodwill.

 

 

The writers on preaching propound a broader view of Character and

 

personality, in which "the whole man Speaks to whole men", to reveal

 

“truth through personality".

   
  
   
  
 
 
  

l| ‘ "
~ "’
D
l
' u. Ie' ~ I
a. nut nu“: L‘ .
‘ . fllfl(‘ii1nfl!,' '
‘ ‘
A If.
.,
'l-‘u btfi’ A
. g
" - - s,
3.
5'. ’l
‘ _.., MI:
1 ‘ J; '2‘)
c <u~ebsflfl~ .,
,
.. . . n
.er utm-

r . Lia mm} ‘

; TL “51“? 'N

,. fur; wi ‘ sb'f

. >-:"..1";5/f[')nk'0>£3
:4; ms .5
@2033“; film ‘
' If v.’ 91'0" '41" __
."Yaz‘fsffl: ‘:’

 

529

The preacher must incarnate the qualities of his Master, hence

distinctively Christian qualities of piety, sincerity, humility, reSpect

 

for persons, and love assume a significance unrealized in Aristotle's

 

 

definitive but narrow ethos-construct.
In their conception of incarnated personality-qualities, the writers

profoundly and significantly modify the Aristotelian ethos-concept.

D. The Significance of the Sources and Deve10pment of Ethos

 

The findings regarding views of the sources and develOpment of
ethos assume added importance because they contrast the two systems
of thought at this vital point.

Aristotle's indefinite explanation of the sources of ethos as topoi

 

and dianoia is starkly contrasted with the explicit and imperious

Christian demand for incarnation of Christlike character and personality,

 

in which even the "non-moral" factors are regarded as elements in
the preacher's total consecration.

This study has revealed the Aristotblian source-motif to be:

 

”Evince persuasive ethos through dianoia", and it has reported the
source-motif of preaching to be: "The man must incarnate his Master. "

The second view is a profoundly significant modification of the first.

E. The Significance of Adaptation to the Audience and the Employment
of the Canons of Rhetoric in Relation to Ethos

 

 

Because of the employment of Aristotelian rhetoric as a rationale,

 

this study has focused attention upon the functions of adaptation to the
audience and canons of rhetoric in the evincing of ethos.

The modifications of the Aristotelian methods viewpoint toward
sincerity, artlessness, and ministry to human needs were seen to be

characteristic of the Christian message, authority, and ministry-premises.

530

These subject-centered stereotypes were seen to prediSpose the
minister to view adaptation, not as the evincing of ethos, but as an aid
in adapting the message for helpful and persuasive ministry to human
needs.

Similarly, these distinctively Christian subject-stereotypes were
seen to modify the function of the canons of rhetoric, so that they
become, not means for the evincing of persuasive ethos, but general
means of effectuating the message, of ”revealing truth through
personality”, and of aiding in "the free interplay of personalities".

In both adaptation and the employment of the canons of rhetoric,
the revelation of reSpected qualities of ethos by the preacher would be
unpremeditated, and therefore genuine and effective.

This study has unconsciously witnessed anew to the perennial
Significance of Aristotle's dictum that ". . . apart from the arguments
in a Speech, there are three things that gain our confidence, namely,
intelligence, character, and good will. "

On these pages have also appeared representatives of an equally
seminal tradition, who unitedly witness that ”preaching must be both

an art and an incarnation. "

 

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

531

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books

 

Allen, Frederick Lewis. Since Yesterday: The Nineteen Thirties
in America. Toronto: Blue Ribbon Books, 1943.

 

 

Altheim, Franz. A History of Roman Religion. Translated by
Harold Mattingly. London: Methuen 81 Co. Ltd. , 1938.

 

Angus, Joseph. The Bible Handbook. Revised by Samuel G. Green.
London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1952.

 

Aristotle. The Rhetoric. Translated by Lane Cooper. New York:
Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1932.

 

Augustine. Christian Instruction. Translated by John G. Gavigan,
Vol. IV of The Fathers of the Church. Edited by Ludwig Sch0pp
e_t :11. 72 Vols. New York: Cima Publishing Co. , Inc. , 1947.

 

 

Baldwin, Charles Sears. Medieval Rhetoric and Poetic. Gloucester,
Mass.: Peter Smith, 1959.

 

. Ancient Rhetoric and Poetic. Gloucester, Mass.:
Peter Smith, 1959.

 

 

Baird, A. C. (ed.) Representative American Speeches, 1946-1947.
New York: H. W. Wilson Company, 1947.

 

Barlow, George. (ed.) Preacher's Homiletic Commentary. 32 Vols.
London: Funk 81 Wagnall's Co. n.d.

 

Barrow, R. H. Slavery in the Roman Empire. New York: The Dial
Press Inc. , 1928.

 

Barry, Alfred. "The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Ephesians,
Philippians, and Colossians, ” Ellicotts Commentary on the
Whole Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1959.

 

 

532

533

Bax, Ernest Belfort. A Handbook of the History of Philosophy.
London: George Bell & Sons, 1886.

 

Berkhof, L. Paul the Missionary. Grand Rapids, Michigan:
Eerdmans-Sevensma Co. , n. d.

 

Boak, Arthur E. R. A History of Rome to 565 A. D. 4th ed. New York:
The Macmillan Co. , 1955.

 

Bridges, Horace J. Humanity on Trial. New York: Liveright
Publishing Corporation, 1941.

 

Bryant, Donald C. (ed.) The Rhetorical Idiom. Ithaca, New York:
Cornell University Press, 1958.

 

Burton, Ernest De Witt. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on
the Epistle to the Galatians of The International Critical
Commentary. Edited by S. D. Driver et a1. Edinburgh:

T 81 T Clark, 1948.

 

 

 

 

Buttrick, George Arthur et al. (eds.) The Interpreters Bible: the
Holy Scriptures in the-king James and Revised Standard Versions
with General Articles and Introduction, Exegesis, Exposition for
Each Book of the Bible. 12 volumes. New York: Abingdon-
Cokesbury Press, 1951-1957.

 

 

 

 

Case, Shirley Jackson. The Evolution of Early Christianity.
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1927.

 

Campbell, George. The Philosophy of Rhetoric. New York: Harper 81
Brothers, 1871.

 

Cartledge, Samuel A. A Conservative Introduction to the New Testament.
Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1951.

 

Chakotin, Serge. The Rape of the Masses. London: Butler & Lenner
Ltd. , 1940.

 

Chase, F. H. (ed.) The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges.
[volumes not numbered] Cambridge, England: The University
Press, 1913-1954.

 

.‘IIIIII. ’Iv.I-:..

 

534

Church, Alfred John and Brodribb, William Jackson. Translators.
The Complete Works of Tacitus. New York: The Modern
Library, 1942f

 

Cicero, De Oratore. Translated by J. S. Watson. London: Henry
J. Bohn, 1855.

 

Clark, Donald Lemen. Rhetoric in Gr‘aeco-Roman Education.
New York: Columbia University Press, 01957.

 

Cochrane, Charles Norris. Christianity and Classical Culture:
A Study of Thought and Action from Augustus to Augustine.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1957.

 

 

C0pleston, Frederick. A History of Philosophy. Vol. I Greece and
Rome [6 vols. in set] Westminster, Maryland: The Newman
Press, 1953.

 

 

Cortright, Rupert L. and Hinds, George L. Creative Discussion.
New York: The Macmillan Co. , 1959.

 

Craig, Clarence Tucker. "Introduction to the First Epistle to the
Corinthians, " Vol. X of The Interpreters Bible. Edited by
George Arthur Buttrick et a1. 12 vols. New York: Abingdon-
Cokesbury Press, 19513937.

 

Deissman, Adolf Gustav. Paul: A Study in Social and Religious
History. Translated by William E. Wilson. New York:
Harper, 1957.

 

Dill, Samuel. Roman Society from Nero to Marcus Aurelius.
London: Macmillan & Co. , 1925.

 

Dinsmore, Charles Allen. The English Bible as Literature.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co. , 1931.

 

Dostoyevsky, Fyodor. Crime and Punishment. New York: The Modern
Library, Random House, Inc., 1950.

 

Driver, 5. D. et al. (eds.) The International Critical Commentary
on the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments.
Edinburgh: T 81 T Clark, 1910-1951.

 

 

535

Duchesne, Monsignor Louis. The Early History of the Christian
Church (from its foundation to the end of the third century)
New York: Longmans, Green 81 Co. , 1920.

 

 

Duncan, George S. The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians, of The
Moffatt New Testament Commentary. Edited by James Moffatt
[no volume numbers] London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1934.

 

 

Eadie, John. Paul the Preacher. New York: R. Carter, 1860.

 

Ehrenberg, Victor. Aspects of the Ancient World. New York:
William Salloch, 1946.

 

Ellicott, Charles John. (ed.) Ellicott's Commentary on the Whole
Bible. 8 vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House,
1959.

 

 

Eiselen, F. C. et al. (eds.) The Abingdon Bible Commentary.
[a single vol. —only] Nashville, New York: Abingdon- Cokesbury
Press, 1929.

 

Eisenson, Jon. The Psychology of Speech. New York: Appleton-
Century-Crofts, Inc., 1938.

 

Farrar, F. W. Life and Work of Paul. London: Cassell 81 Company
Ltd., 1908.

 

. The Messages of the Books. London: Macmillan & Co. ,

 

 

1884.

Fisher, George P. The Beginnings of Christianity, with a View of the

 

State of the Roman World at the Birth of Christ. London:
Charles Scribner's Sons, 1877.

 

. History of the Christian Church. London: Hodder 81
Stoughton, 1887.

 

 

Foakes-Jackson, F. J. The Life of Saint Paul: The Man and the
Apostle. New York: Boni and Liveright, 1926.

 

Forsyth, P. T. Positive Preaching and the Modern Mind. London:
Hodder 81 Stoughton, 1907.

 

1...“.

. 1
..
“ I.
. ,‘
.,
. '» r!
..
“.51 I ;4
Lo‘ 1 . .
an“ ‘ 1
_.

 

   
 
   
    
 

(a...) at. 3‘9:
' K
. wit 1:11 H10,»

~:r.:;;-I 411.1

‘ '1 1‘ .(11'1. 1. »_ .
.. '._’. $131013”

aihi

;‘ , . :,-ll.t:.easM

W111}: grill)
.Y‘H'

,-. ;_:_ my“ .‘L'J‘

' 2.:‘10Y

x {=1 gvfig‘.._
.' ”(I ‘00."; a)“

.I"

 

536

Fowler, Henry Thatcher. The History and Literature of the New
Testament. New York: The Macmillan Co. , 1925.

 

 

Gavigan, John J. (tr.) "Christian Instruction, " St. Augustine, Vol. IV
of The Fathers of the Church, ed. Ludwig Sch0pp e_t 2:1. 72 vols.
New York: Cima Publishing Co. , Inc. , 1947.

 

 

Genung, John Franklin. A Guidebook to the Biblical Literature.
Boston: Ginn and Company, 1919.

 

Geiseman, Otto Albert Ferdinanc. "Paul's Method of Preaching the
Gospel. " Unpublished Master's Dissertation, University of
Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, August, 1928.

Giordani, Igino. St. Paul Apostle and Martyr. Translated from the
Italian by Mother Clelia Maranzana and Mother Paula Williamson.
New York: Macmillan Co. , 1946.

 

Glover, T. R. Paul of Tarsus. New York: George H. Doran Company,
1930.

 

. The Conflict of Religions in the Early Roman Empire.

 

London: Methuen 81 Co., Ltd. , 1932.

The World of the New Testament. New York: The Macmillan

 

 

Co. , 1931.

Godet, F. Introduction to the New Testament. Translated by W.
Affleck. Edinburgh: T 81 T Clark, 1899.

 

Grenier, Albert. The Roman Spirit in Religion, Thought, and Art.
London: K. Paul, Trench, Trubner 81 Co., Ltd., 1926.

 

Hackett, H. B. (ed.) William Smith's Dictionary of the Bible. 4 vols.
Boston: Houghton, Mifflin 81 Co., 1881.

 

Hamilton, Edith. The Greek Way to Western Civilization. New York:
The New American Library of World Literature, Inc. , 1959.

 

Heard, Gerald. Morals Since 1900. London: Andrew Dakers Ltd.
1950. -

 

 

-.~Y wot.

.1'« 3t 1‘10

"_‘
‘u, MHZ“)

v .' ,.

, -<‘ , "
p, - - .
.‘~11 r 9d? ’ ~'

"~5,,- -.
311-.141} 1;-.Sj‘zfi -

   
     
   
    
  
   

. '1 ml -.-J :14

~ m) .-

.- 71,11111' 7,--

I.; data. ‘3'

as"

-4111“. ' “ ‘?

.11. '17:, 1' tt.‘
‘ ma?) 1'
a

,

e
.. e.

. . ‘5‘ "Q-. '1‘
; ,:.,‘,11(d

4 . .111 9110i
1."

1. 293110;. '

.‘ _‘.IVAUCM

: J :1 ”drifts." ~'

537

Henry, Carl F. H. Contemporary Evangelical Thought. New York:
Channel Press, 1957.

 

. Christian Personal Ethics. Grand Rapids: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Co. , 1957.

 

 

. The Drift of Western Thought. Grand Rapids: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Co. , 1951.

 

 

Hitler, Adolf. Mein Kampf. New York: Reynal and Hitchcock, 1939.

 

The Holy Bible, King James Version. Oxford: The University Press.

 

The Holy Bible. Revised Standard Version. Containing the Old and
New Testaments. London: Thomas Nelson and Sons, Ltd. ,
19520

 

 

Howson, John S. The Metaphors of St. Paul and Companions of St. Paul.
[no place named] American Tract Society, 1871.

 

Hoyt, Arthur F. The Work of Preaching. New York: Macmillan 81 Co. ,
1905.

 

Innes, Kathleen E., The Bible as Literature. London: J. Cape, 1930.

 

Jacobs, Henry E. et a1. Annotations on the Epistles of Paul to
1 Corinthians' Chapters 7-16, 11 Corinthians and Galatians.
Vol. VIII of The Lutheran Commentary. Edited by Henry E.
Jacob, 12 vols. New York: The Christian Literature Co. , 1897.

 

 

 

Jacobs, Henry E. (ed.) The Lutheran Commentary. 12 vols.
New York: The Christian Literature Co. , 1897.

 

Jamieson, Fausset and Brown. Commentary on the Whole Bible.
Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 11. d.

 

Jefferson, C. E. The Character of Paul. New York: Macmillan,
1923.

 

Jellema, Dirk. "Ethics, " Contemporary Evangelical Thought. Edited
by Carl F. H. Henry. New York: 'Channel Press, 1957.

 

538

Kepler, Thomas S. Contemporary Thinking About Paul. New York:
Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, 1950.

 

Klein, Herbert. (ed.) The War for Men's Minds. Los Angeles:
Los Angeles City College Press, 1940.

 

Kling, C. E. "The Second Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians. " Vol.
XXI of Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Critical, Doctrinal
and Homiletical,., with Special Reference to Ministers and
Students. Edited by Johanne Peter Lange e_t a1. Translated from
the German, and edited, with additions, by Philip Schaff eta1.

25 vols. New York: Scribner & Sons Co., 1884-85. " "

 

 

 

Knox, John. Chapters in a Life of Paul. New York: Abingdon-
Cokesbury Press, 1946.

 

Kuist, Howard Tillman. The Pedagogy of St. Paul. New York:
George H. Doran Co. , 1925.

 

Lagerkvist, Par. Barabbas. New York: Random House, 1951.

 

Lewin, Thomas. The Life and Epistles of St. Paul. 4th edition re-
vised. Vol. 2. London: George Bell 81 Sons, 1878.

 

Liddon, H. P. Essays and Addresses. London: Longmans, Green 81
Co., 1892.

 

Lietzmann, Hans. The Beginnings of the Christian Church. Trans-
lated by Bertram Lee Woolf. New York: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1949.

 

Lightfoot, J. B. Biblical Essays. London: Macmillan 81 Co., 1893.

 

. Dissertations on the Apostolic Age. London: Macmillan
81 Co. , 1882.

 

 

Lindsay, Thomas M. A History of the Reformation. 2 vols.
New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1928.

 

Lipsky, Abram. John Wesley--A Portrait. New York: Simon 81
Schuster, 1928.

 

539

Longinus. On Great Writing (On the Sublime). Translated by
G. M. A. Grube. New York: The Liberal Arts Press, 1957.

 

Luther, Martin. A Commentary on the St. Paul's Epistle to the
Galatians, Based on Lectures Delivered at the University of
Wittenberg in the Year 1531. Edited by Philip S. Watson,
[no translator named]. London: J. Clarke, 1953.

 

 

Luthin, Reinhold Henry. American Demagogues: Twentieth Century.
Boston: Beacon Press, 1954.

 

MacMunn, George. Slavery Through the Ages. London: Nicholson
and Watson Ltd. , 1938.

 

McClintock, John and Strong, James. Cyc10paedia of Biblical, Theo-
logical, and Ecclesiastical Literature. 10 vols. and 2 supple-
mentary volumes. lst Edition. New York: Harper 81 Brothers,
Publishers, 1877. ‘

 

 

Meyer, F. B. Paul a Servant of Jesus Christ. London: Morgan 81
Scott, 11. d.

 

Mills, Glen E. Composing the Speech. New York: Prentice, Hall.
1952.

 

Montesquieu. Considerations on the Causes of the Granduer and
Decadence of the Romans. Translated by Jehu Baker. New York:
D. Appleton and Company, 1882.

 

 

Moulton, Richard G. e_t a_._1. The Bible as Literature, New York:
Thomas Y. Crowell Co. , n.d.

 

Nilsson, Martin P. Imperial Rome. Translated by S. C. Richards.
London: S. Bell 81 Sons, Ltd., 1926.

 

Oesterley, W. O. E., and J. H. Robinson. A History of Israel.
Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1951.

 

O'Neill, Ana Maria, Ethics for the Atomic Age. Boston: Meador
Publishing Co. , 1948.

 

Packard, Vance. The Hidden Persuaders. New York: Pocket Books,
Inc., 1959.

 

  
       
   

.1 ~ . ,, rm .
11'?» X's-11m 4' ‘

1
r.
. 11“ 5‘. ‘
,,.
. . )51f‘.‘3‘
.
L-

. .sga- =
. . 1.1 .noe -=

. 1 I..!
.'1', 11min , 'V
11 fans

540

Peabody, Francis Greenwood. The Apostle Paul and the Modern
World. New York: The Macmillan Co. , 1926.

 

 

Phillips, J. B. Letters to Young Churches. New York: The
Macmillan Co. , 1948.

 

Plummer, A. (ed.) The Second Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the
Corinthians, of series The Cambridge Bible for Schools and
Colleges. Edited by F. H. Chase [volumes not numbered].
Cambridge: University Press, 1923.

 

 

 

 

Plumptre, E. H. "The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, " Vol. VII
of Ellicott's Commentary on the Whole Bible. Edited by Charles
John Ellicott. 8 vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing
House, 1959.

 

Quintilian. Institutes of Oratory. Translated by J. S. Watson.
London: G. Bell and Sons, 1903.

 

Quimby, Chester Warren. Paul for Everyone.) New York: The
Macmillan Co. , 1946.

 

Ramm, Bernard. Protestant Christian Evidences. Chicago, 111.:
Moody Press, 1954.

 

Ramsay, William Mitchell. The Church in the Roman Empire.
New York: G. P. Putman's Sons, 1893.

 

Rand, Edward Kennard. The Building of Eternal Rome. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1943.

 

Robertson, Archibald, and Alfred Plummer. A Critical and Exegetical

 

Commentary on the First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians,
of The International Critical Commentary on the Holy Scriptures
of the Old and New Testament. Edited by S. D. Driver et a1.
Edinburgh: T 8: T Clark, 1950. 7 "

 

 

 

Rudin, John G. "The Concept of Ethos in Late American Preaching."
Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Dept. of Speech, Northwestern
University, Evanston, 111.

Russell, Bertrand. Mysticism and Logic. London: George Allen 81
UDWin, Ltd., 19490

 

541

Sanday, W. "The Epistle to the Galatians, " Vol. VII of Ellicott's
Commentary on the Whole Bible. Edited by Charles John
Ellicott, 8 vols. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing
House, 1959.

 

 

Schaff, Philip e_t a_1. (eds.) Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures:
Critical, Doctrinal and Homiletical, with Special Reference to
Ministers and Students. New York: Scribner 81 Sons Co. , 1884-85.

 

 

 

Schmoller, Otto. "The Epistle to the Philippians, " Vol. 22 Lange's
Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. ‘ Edited by Philip Schaff, 25
vols. New York: Scribner 81 Sons Co., 1884-85.

 

Schopp, Ludwig (ed.) _e_t 11. The Fathers of the Church. 72 vols.
New York: Cima Publishing Co. , Inc. , 1947-1960.

 

Schramm, Wilbur. ReSponsibility in Mass Communication. New York:
Harper &Brothers, 1957.

 

Scott, Nathan A. Jr. The Broken Center. New York: The National
Council, 1959.

 

Sheen, Monsignor Fulton. ”Signs of the Times, " Representative
American Speeches 1946-1947. Edited by A. C. Baird.
New York: H. W. Wilson Company, 1947.

 

 

Short, John. "Exposition of First Corinthians, " Vol. X of The
Interpreter's Bible: The Holy Scriptures in the King James and
Revised Standard Versions with General Articles and Introduction,
Exegesis, Exposition for Each Book of the Bible. Edited by
George Arthur Buttrick et a1. 12 vols. New York: Abingdon-
Cokesbury Press, 1951:1957.

 

 

 

Smith, David. The Life and Letters of St. Paul. New York:
Harper, n. d.

 

Smith, Wilbur M. Therefore Stand. Boston: W. A. Wilde Co., 1945.

 

Sorokin, Pitirim. A. The Crisis of Our Age. New York: E. P.
Dutton 81 Co. , Inc. , 1946.

 

542

Speer, Robert E. Paul, The All-Round Man. New York: Fleming
and Revell, 1909.

 

Stalker, James. The Life of St. Paul. New York: Fleming H. Revell
Co. , n. d.

 

Stevens, George B. The Pauline Theology. New York: Charles
Scribner's Sons, 1892.

 

Stamm, Raymond T. "Galatians, " Vol. X. of The Interpreters Bible:
The Holy Scriptures in the King James and Revised Standard
Versions with General Articles and Introduction, Exegesis,
Exposition for Each Book of the Bible. Edited by George Arthur
Buttrick et a1. , 12 vols. New York: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press,
1951-195'7’. " ‘

 

 

 

 

Starr, Chester G. Civilization and the Caesars: The Intellectual
Revolution in the Roman Empire. Ithaca, New York: Cornell
University Press, 1954.

 

 

Sumner, J. B. Apostolical Preaching Considered in an Examination
of St. Paul's Epistles. London: J. Hatchard and Son, 1824.

 

 

Swain, Joseph Ward. The Ancient World. Vol. I. New York:
Harper 81 Brothers.

 

Swensson, Carl Aaron. "Annotations on the Epistle of St. Paul to the
Galatians, " Vol. VII of The Lutheran Commentary. Edited by
Henry E. Jacobs. 12 vols. New York: Christian Literature Co. ,
1895- 1898 .

 

Tacitus. "A Dialogue on Oratory, " The Complete Works of Tacitus.
Translated by Alfred John Church and William Jackson Brodribb.
New York: The Modern Library, 1942.

 

Tholuck, A. Remarks on the Life, Character, and Style of the Apostle
Paul. Edinburgh: Thomas Clark, 1840.

 

 

Thonssen, Lester (ed.) Selected Readings in Rhetoric and Public
Speaking. New York: The H. W. Wilson Co., 1942.

 

 

Thonssen, Lester and Baird, Craig A. Speech Criticism. New York:
The Ronald Press Company, 1948.

 

543

Trench, Richard Chenevix. Synonyms of the New Testament.
London: Macmillan 81 Co. , 1880.

 

Van Loon, Hendrick W. The Story of Mankind. New York: Pocket
Books, Inc. , 1939.

 

Vincent, Marvin R. Philippians and Philemon [volumes not numbered],
of The International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: 1950.

 

 

Waddy, Lawrence. Pax Romana and World Peace. London: Chapman
81 Hall, 1950.

 

Walbank, F. W. The Decline of the Roman Empire in the West.
London: Cobbett Press, 1946.

 

Weber, Alfred. History of Philosophy. Translated by Frank Thilby.
New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1896.

 

Weinel, H. St. Paul--The Man and His Work. New York: Williams
and Norgate, 1906.

 

White, Ellen G. The Acts of the Apostles. Mountain View, Calif.:
Pacific Press, 1911.

 

Wild, Laura H. A Literary Guide to the Bible. New York: George H.
Doran Co. , 1922.

 

Willmott, Robert Aris. (ed.) The Works of George Herbert in Prose
and Verse. New York: D. Appleton 81 Co. , 1857.

 

 

Windelband, W. A History of Philosophy. Translated by James H.
Tufts. New York: The Macmillan Co. , 1901.

 

Wood, C. T. (ed.) Life, Letters and Religion of St. Paul. Edinburgh:
T 81 T Clark, 1949.

 

Wordsworth, Christ0pher. The New Testament of Our Lord and Saviour
Jesus Christ. In the Original Greek with Introductions and Notes.
2 Vols. London: Rivingtons, 1872.

 

 

No Editor named: Studies in Rhetoric and Public Speaking in Honor of
James A. Winans. New York: The Century Company, 1925.

 

 

544

Journals and Articles

 

Baskerville, Barnet. "American DemagogueS--Twentieth Century, "
Quarterly Journal of Speech, XLI (August, 1955) 179-180.

 

. "Emerson as a Critic on Oratory, " Southern Speech Journal,

 

 

Vol. XVIII (March, 1953) 150-162.

Black, Edwin. "Plato's View of Rhetoric, " Quarterly Journal of Speech,
XLIV (December, 1958) 361-374.

 

Brigance, W. Norwood. "1946 Year of Decision, " Quarterly Journal
of Speech, Vol.XXXIII (April, 1947) 127-133.

 

 

Bryant, Donald C. "Rhetoric: Its Functions and Its Sc0pe, " Quarterly
Journal of Speech, Vol.XXXIX (December, 1953) 401-424.

 

 

Croft, A. J. "The Functions of Rhetorical Criticism, " Quarterly
Journal of Speech, Vol. XLII (October, 1956) 283-291.

 

 

Hale, W. H. ”The Politicians Try Victory Through Air Power, "
Reporter, XV (September, 1956).

 

Haiman, Franklyn S. ”Democratic Ethics and the Hidden Persuaders, "
Quarterly‘Journal of Speech, XLIV (December, 1958) 385-392.

 

Langmuir, Irving. “Science, Common Sense and Decency, " Vital
Speeches, Vol. IX (Jan. 15, 1943) 207-211.

 

 

Lee, Irving J. "Some Conceptions of Emotional Appeal in Rhetorical
Theory, " Speech Monographs, VI, 1939, 66-86.

 

McClintock, John and Strong, James (eds.) ”Interpretation, " Vol. IV
of Cyc10paedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical
Literature. lst Edition, 1880.

 

. "Paul, " Vol. VII of Cyc10paedia of Biblical, Theological and
Ecclesiastical Literature.

 

 

Miller, Clyde R. PrOpaganda Analysis, Institute for Propaganda Analysis,
Vol. I, No. 2 (November, 1937) 1-3.

 

545

Murphy, Richard. "The Speech as a Literary Genre, " Quarterly
Journal of Speech, XLIV (April, 1958) 117-127.

 

Nilsen, Thomas R. "Free Speech, Persuasion, and the Democratic

Process, " Quarterly Journal of Speech, XLIV (October, 1958)
235-243.

Time. December 28, 1959.

 

 

 

   

 

1|. 8.1818wW 1.!
1.11. [$8 .I.1 1
. 11.1.11 11.!

.114
1.. ...

1 . . .

. .4411

-5?

to: p

..

 

"111.

...: . .... 1...: . ..1 : ... ... . ....£.1..;,m .:7. £11111, 1 41111114106133.111d11.1 agiliilrf
r. . .

1 .. .u1. .. .... Arm 1. ...,1 u

.. 1. .1 .A ... ‘
. . . 1 I..un .- 01.1uot:.lo: ' ., ....1 _..r: *5. ~ .1 3;]... Aku111~on...'3 v“ .o . 51¢?» 91!. r .. so... . ...; . o g . A a
w l .I I . . > . . 1 11 1 1‘ l

1.I.P|1I 1 U

 

 

A..-

 

 

 

 

 

      

           

UNIVERSIYV L

"1111" 11||11111|111118|11fl
0 760

3056 5

"'1111'111111111111111