Review of Ehrensperger's Paul at the Crossroads of Cultures

Ehrensperger, Kathy. Paul at the Crossroads of Cultures: Theologizing in the Space-Between. London: Bloomsbury, 2013. xiv + 224 pp. £65.00 (hardback), ISBN 978-0567046369.

Kathy Ehrensperger, Reader in New Testament Studies at the University of Wales Trinity Saint David, provides a new paradigm for understanding Paul’s theologizing, one that builds on the emerging fields of bilingualism and biculturalism. She concludes that these frameworks provide a better understanding for the way Paul engages the diverse contexts evident in his mission among the nations. Thus, she calls into question key aspects of standard scholarly constructs and provides a more convincing way forward, one that sees Paul as a cultural negotiator in the space between Roman, Greek, and Jewish cultural discourses.

The introduction (chapter 1) highlights the focus of the study, which is to look at Paul’s role as an intercultural communicator, one who is a mediator between Jewish, Greek, and Roman cultural and ethnic traditions. However, Ehrensperger rejects any claim of fusion or assimilation with regard to these processes. This last point is a crucial and most convincing insight from her work as she builds on the findings of bilingualism and biculturalism to understand more clearly Paul’s approach to communication (e.g. as one embedded in Judaism but conversant in multiple universes of discourse). Chapter 2 interrogates the concepts of Hellenism and hybridity. The former is rejected as a useful way of describing the interaction between Greek and Jewish culture. The source of the problem relates to Johann Gustav Droysen’s original development of the concept and Martin Hengel’s later appropriation of Droysen’s work. The aspect of Hellenism that is most problematic for Ehrensperger is the idea of cultural fusion. Her rejection of that naturally leads her to critique the use of the postcolonial concept of hybridity. Within Pauline studies, Ehrensperger notes two tendencies: (1) a lack of clarity with regard to what is being implied and (2) an expectation of blending in the intercultural encounter. Both concepts are found to be less than useful for Pauline studies specifically. Hybridity contributes to an assumption that the Christ-movement resulted in a third race while Hellenism, with its problematic ideological roots, often posits Hellenistic Judaism as that which paved the way for the universal and higher religious ideals of Christianity.

Having questioned the continuing validity of two crucial concepts in NT studies, chapter 3 outlines Ehrensperger’s suggested way forward, namely the use of bilingualism and biculturalism in an alternative paradigm for understanding Paul’s intercultural interaction.  This chapter convincingly connects language, culture, and identity via the resources of sociolinguistics. The contribution of Pierre Bourdieu is clearly evident, especially his concept of habitus. Ehrensperger navigates the challenges associated with defining culture and ethnicity and concludes that Farzad Sharifian’s idea of cultural conceptualizations connects well with Bourdieu’s work while Floya Anthias’ distinction between ethnic and cultural groups is probative. Of particular interest with regard to Paul is the idea of relational ethnicity; this properly recontextualizes Jewish particularity within wider on-going cultural discourse during the first century CE. The chapter continues by outlining the research into bilingualism and biculturalism especially as it relates to ethnic diversity. It is evident in this section just how pervasively the monolinguistic context of NT scholars has contributed to the premature closing off of certain interpretive options. The chapter concludes with a nuanced discussion of the way a lingua franca does not necessarily lead to cultural blending; rather, localized diversity is more often evident in such a cultural context.

Chapter 4 highlights linguistic, ethnic, and cultural diversity within the Roman Empire. This wide-ranging survey further substantiates Ehrensperger’s claim that blending and fusion of collective identities was not the norm. The preponderance of literary and inscriptional artifacts in Greek and the comparative lack of vernacular languages for these is a challenge to the thesis put forth in this monograph. Thus, this chapter seeks to deconstruct the standard view for the significance of this evidence. Particularly problematic for the standard view are the elite fallacy and the power dynamics associated with provincial collaborators and Rome. Here Ehrensperger’s feminist hermeneutic proves quite useful in discerning problematic interpretive trajectories. A few highlights from this chapter include: (1) a reminder that the use of Greek language does not necessarily imply the acceptance of Greek culture; (2) Jewish literature of the period, identified as barbaric literature, provides an important interpretive lens for understanding ways to respond to Roman and Greek hegemony; (3) since there was no blended ‘Graeco-Roman’ cultural construct during the Early Principate this term should only be use cautiously and with ‘definitional clarity’ (p. 77 n. 72); and (4) bicultural mediators (e.g. Manetho, Lucian, Josephus, and Philo) perform vital functions in any situation of cultural contact and the Early Principate was no exception. These combine to support Ehrensperger’s developing thesis, that ‘Paul and his co-workers…embarked on a mission which included the mediation/translation of an alternative to the dominating imperial discourse rooted in the Jewish alternative tradition that had developed over centuries of interaction with others’ (p. 101).

Chapter 5 places Paul on the first century map with regard to cultural, ethnic, and linguistic diversity. Ehrensperger cleverly weaves in and out of existing debates within Pauline studies as they impinge on Paul’s identity and practices as an intercultural meditator. She begins by discussing the way Paul would have been viewed from the perspective of Roman imperial discourse. She then moves into an important review of ethnē from a Roman perspective and provides an overview of the important work done on this topic from the research of Davina Lopez and Brigitte Kahl. Ehrensperger concludes that Paul would have been viewed as a member of a subjugated ethnē; however, he does not describe himself or his own people with the same term –for that he uses the term genos. Thus, Paul’s ‘us and them’ categorization is different than that practiced by the Romans. In the discussion of genos, Ehrensperger see Paul as one who continues to identify with his ‘descent group’, values his Jewishness, and maintains full Torah observance (p. 130). Next Ehrensperger discusses the Jewish perspective on ta ethnē and rejects the idea that such universalizing discourse suggests that Paul thought existing identities were obliterated. The collective identity of members of the nations is not problematic for Paul in the main but only when it results in idolatrous practices. One of the fascinating interpretive moves that Ehrensperger makes is that Paul’s view of Jews and the people from the nations may have not developed in a significant way. Thus for Paul, there was no ‘third kind’ within the Christ-movement; there were ‘those of the peritomē and those of the akrobustia in Christ, but no mixture between them’ (p. 131). This chapter concludes with a profile of Paul’s Jewish identity: he was at least bilingual, received a Greek Jewish education, and would have continued to be identified as one of the peritomē, one embedded ‘in the alternative Greek discourse of his people (genos)’ (p. 137).

Chapter 6 focuses on the role of Israel’s scriptural tradition and its interpretation as it moves between cultural contexts. The development of the LXX serves as an exemplar of the way ideas written within the Hebrew symbolic universe are transformed when translated into Greek. This model serves as a helpful comparison for the challenges Paul, as part of the polyglot Jewish interpretive tradition, dealt with when communicating his gospel since it is sourced in a similar symbolic universe. The influence of Israel’s apocalyptic tradition is also seen in Paul’s writings, especially as it interacts with Roman threats of violence and totalitarianism. Thus, Ehrensperger rightly places the Christ-movement as part of an ‘existing Jewish resistance tradition’ (p. 151). However, this resistance did not lead Paul to conclude that all aspects of one’s former life had been obliterated in Christ. One of the important contributions of Ehrensperger’s work is the recognition of aspects of life among the nations that continue in Christ. The chapter concludes with two examples of the way paying attention to various cultural scripts results in interpretive clarity; these include the unity of Israel and the nations, and the understanding of the social implications of pist- related words. The former reveals Paul as one seeking to achieve unity among the nations in ways that challenged the approach of the Romans, while the latter, emphasizing faithfulness, trust, and loyalty, reveals a stark difference between pist- discourse and Roman fides discourse. Taken together, these two examples show the interpretive value of Ehrensperger’s new paradigm.

Chapter 7 provides an analysis of the challenges associated with everyday ritual life within the Roman Empire. Ehrensperger offers a convincing reading of 1 Corinthians 8-10, one that reveals the difficulty of negotiating the existing ritual experiences of those from the nations. This chapter brings to the fore the significance of the bicultural paradigm and shows Paul to be open to aspects of the cultural life of the nations, as long as these align with God’s glory (1 Cor. 10.31). Also, in her discussion of the table of the Lord, she makes a compelling argument that Paul was not critiquing the Jerusalem Temple but still viewed it as the centre of the cult for the God of Israel, with differing implications for Christ-followers from the nations and from Israel both of whom Christ links in ‘peace’ and ‘mutual empowerment’ (pp. 211, 213). 

Chapter 8 highlights the key components of bilingualism and biculturalism that were relevant to Ehrensperger’s study and synthesizes many of the arguments developed in the preceding chapters. She reminds her readers that, in light of her new paradigm, ‘any attempt to emphasize one dimension involved in this translation process, Jewish, “Greek or barbarian”, at the expense of the other, is inadequate’. Ehrensperger is calling for clear attention to all the narratives of belonging and cultural encyclopedias in existence in the first century CE as a way to better understand the ‘loss and gain’ evident in Paul’s mission as an intercultural mediator (p. 219). For Paul, his gospel discourse remains ‘to the Jew first and also to the Greek’ (Rom. 1.16b) and this paradigmatic statement takes on seminal significance in Ehrensperger’s approach. This is not merely a salvation historical statement but one of embeddedness and belonging. Paul’s message required cross-cultural communication which necessitated some familiarity with non-Jewish cult practices, though there is also a distinct lack of integration of existing philosophical or mythic traditions because his ‘narrative framework is entirely Jewish’ (p. 221). The book concludes with an important call to contemporary Jewish-Christian dialogue as a direct implication of Paul’s theologizing at the crossroads of cultures.

I found very little to disagree with in this monograph, though one wonders if we can discern with any level of specificity the presence of former God-fearers within Paul’s addressees or the extent to which non-Christ-following Jews are part of Paul’s theologizing. These each deserve further investigation, especially since the latter is crucial for this approach to Paul. What Ehrensperger has presented in Paul at the Crossroads of Cultures is nothing short of a paradigm shift. Her approach, which I see as completely on target, will – in due time – change the way Pauline scholars engage Paul and his diverse contexts. The lenses of bilingualism and biculturalism genuinely move the interpretive discussion forward – a rare achievement in an era of ever-increasing monographs dealing with the apostle Paul. This work is highly recommended and one that Pauline scholars will have to respond to since the implications of her work touch almost every current debate within the field. 

Paul and the Dynamics of Power

Paul and the Dynamics of Power: Communication and Interaction in the Early Christ-Movement. By Kathy Ehrensperger. New York, NY: T&T Clark, 2009. Pp. xiv + 235. Paper, $39.95; 2007. Pp. xiv + 235. Cloth, $140.00.

This book argues that Paul approached power in a differentiated manner, one that should not be subsumed under the rubric of domination or power-over. Kathy Ehrensperger provides a contextually sensitive reading of Paul’s power discourse in order to provide insights into how authority was deployed within the early Christ-movement.

Chapter One serves as an introduction to the book and orients the reader to previous studies on Paul and power (e.g. Schütz, Holmberg, Kittredge, and Polaski); and Ehrensperger’s presuppositions, which include: Paul’s Jewish embeddedness and the Roman empire as his primary interlocutor. These guide her exegetical choices throughout the book, e.g. Paul’s approach to argumentation has its source in the Jewish symbolic universe and the domination of the Roman empire serves as a key reason as to why Paul chose not to seek to dominate members of the early Christ-movement. Ehrensperger’s approach to Paul and power is examined as his extant letters are interpreted in a dialectic between his epistolary discourse and contemporary power theories (e.g. Weber, Foucault, Arendt, Wartenberg, and Allen). Chapter Two surveys these approaches to power and provides an explanatory rationale for her study and argues that a binary understanding of power in Paul is unwarranted and that he deployed power for empowerment and not for domination. Thus, Paul’s approach to power was strategic, situationally determined, and combined aspects of “power-over, power-to, and power-with” (34) in order to establish stable communities of Christ-followers throughout the Mediterranean basin.

Chapter Three extends Ehrensperger’s argument by explaining how communication occurred within the Pauline communities. Paul is understood as part of a network of leaders working together to establish communities of Christ-followers by means of letters which relied on the resources of kinship language to establish their social identity in Christ. Ehrensperger’s contrapuntal reading is evident as she understands Paul to be in a hierarchically-defined, asymmetrical relationship with his addressees but that this relationship was temporary and that planned obsolescence, similar to Wartenberg’s concept of “transformative power” (61) describes accurately Paul’s application of power. Chapter Four addresses Paul’s discourse of grace, not as a hidden discourse of power but as an others-centered discourse of empowerment that has its source in Israel’s Scriptures. Chapters Five and Six focus on the interaction of identity, power, and culture within the Christ-movement in light of the Roman empire. The subversive nature of the apostolic message as an “alternative value system” (97) to Roman elitism is discussed as the leaders of the Christ-movement are understood to be re-socializing key components of Roman social identity within the constraints placed upon them by the empire. Chapters Seven and Eight argue that Paul’s approach to communal formation was thoroughly Jewish in its orientation. Paul’s epistolary discourse is understood in the context of Jewish pedagogical practices which allows her to uncover analogs for Paul’s discourse primarily in the Jewish Scriptures and not from Greco-Roman moral philosophers. Paul functions as a group prototype or exemplar in his letters and Ehrensperger discusses mimesis as an implicit critique of Roman imperial ideology and a call to follow those who “embody the message of the gospel and its alternative values” (154). Chapter Nine argues that Paul was seeking to transform communal life within the Christ-movement based on a prior relationship of trust between Paul and his audience and that if Paul’s goal was to dominate the group; then letters are an inefficient way to accomplish that. Chapter Ten concludes by arguing that Paul exercised power in a transformative manner and that he would not exercise it in a manner similar to the Roman empire in that it would be inconsistent with the message of Israel’s Scriptures and Christ-crucified.

Ehrensperger has produced an excellent monograph that provides a fine example of how contemporary social-scientific theories can interact with ancient texts. One slight concern, 1 Cor 4:21 is rightly noted as a counter-example of transformative power and that it will be addressed in section “10.4” (179 n. 2). When one reads that section; however, one only finds a general discussion about how the leaders in the Christ-movement did not always live up to the standards of the gospel. A discussion of how this key verse on Paul and power is to be understood in the context of transformative power would have been helpful. That slight concern aside, this monograph deserves a wide reading from Pauline scholars, graduate students looking for an excellent example of clear argumentation, and practitioners in ministry who will find in it timely insights into how to apply Paul’s theologizing to concrete ministry settings.

A slightly different version of this originally appeared as: Review of Kathy Ehrensperger, Paul and the Dynamics of Power: Communication and Interaction in the Early Christ-Movement. (Library of New Testament studies, 325. London: T & T Clark, 2007), Biblical Theology Bulletin, volume 39, no. 3 (Aug 2009): 175-76.

Reading Paul in Context Book Notice

After coming home from our seminary graduation, I came by the Continuum website and they have published the notice concerning the Festschrift Kathy Ehrensperger and I edited in honor of William S. Campbell. If interested in seeing the chapters in the book, click here (link will take you to the Continuum website). I'll talk more about the book throughout the next few months.

Kathy Ehrensperger: Power and Identity Formation

The vital interaction of identity and power is central to the work of Kathy Ehrensperger (2007). The agency of Paul, which is expressed primarily in his teaching role, emerges as he seeks ‘consciously to shape their identity’(2007: 15, 123). Identity formation, for Paul, was not an optional add-on to his teaching but was central to his work among the nations (193). Ehrensperger argues that Paul was in a ‘transformative power relationship’ with the communities he founded, such as the one in Corinth. She argues, however that he exercised power ‘in a differentiated way which cannot be subsumed under’ a Weberian or Foucaultian concept of ‘power-over in the vein of a command-obedience structure’ (155). Ehrensperger builds on the work of Wartenberg who understands transformative power to include both supportive guidance and temporally limited asymmetry; and Arendt’s concept of communicative power as a ‘web of interdependency’ within the correctives provided by both Habermas and Allen (178; cf. 18-9). She understands Paul’s letters to be attempts to empower his communities to ‘act in concert’ with their calling ‘for the enhancement of all’ and shows Paul interacting with them in a way similar to the ‘domination-free communication’ found in the contemporary writings of Wartenberg, Arendt, Habermas, and Allen (178). The program that Ehrensperger lays out is one in which scholars are encouraged ‘to move beyond the command-obedience paradigms of power’ to a more differentiated understanding of the positive dynamics of power in Paul and his writings, that is to say empowerment (178).

Two overarching presuppositions in Ehrensperger’s work on power and its impact on identity formation include Paul’s thorough embeddedness in Judaism and its Scriptures and the all-pervading influence of the Roman Empire (4-11). The implications of these presuppositions include the secondary use of Greco-Roman sources for understanding or explaining Paul’s line of argument (125). Likewise, the realization of the pervasive and pretentious inclination for power and domination within the Roman Empire is understood as the reason for Paul’s desire not to ‘lord it over’ the gentiles (cf. 2 Cor 1:24; Mat 20:25-26a). In her earlier work (2004) she notes in this regard that Paul ‘was teaching in small groups and wrote letters to tiny marginalized communities, thereby using his gospel implicitly to oppose the Roman imperial order’ (141, 157). She concludes, concerning ‘Judaism, with its exclusive loyalty to the one and only God of Israel and the identity-shaping dimension this loyalty had for their way of life, was actually incompatible with these goals of Roman imperial policy’ (2007: 9-10). Paul, however, was no revolutionary; he worked within the Roman system to stabilize his Christ-following communities throughout the Mediterranean basin, while recognizing that because of Christ their doom is sealed (1 Cor 2:6-8).

Ehrensperger follows very closely the particularized understanding of identity evident in the work of William S. Campbell. In critiquing the work of Sandnes she rightly concludes ‘Paul’s and his colleagues’ perception of the gospel did not bypass or in any way obliterate Israel’s identity or future’ (2007: 96; Campbell 2006: 144). She also rejects any notion ‘of Paul as ‘stealing’ the identity of the Jews as God’s people and transferring it to the church’ (2007: 158-59). At the same time, she emphasizes the importance of kinship language and connects it with Paul’s approach to identity formation in a manner similar to Jewish family education rather than seeing analogs within Greco-Roman education approaches (47-48). Also, her approach to gender identity is slightly less-essentialist than Campbell’s general understanding of Jewish identity (2007: 28; 2004: 97-110; Campbell 2006: 5).

In terms of the methodological debate between Philip Esler and David Horrell on the use of models, Ehrensperger aligns more closely with Horrell’s approach. She recognizes themes that emerge from her exegesis and then turns to contemporary political or social theories to which provide the language resources from which to discuss important issues relating to identity, power, and biblical studies. Thus her work does not, overtly apply social identity theory, it resonates with many of the concerns addressed by feminist, postcolonial, and social-scientific scholars.

References:

Kathy Ehrensperger, (2007) Paul and the Dynamics of Power: Communication and Interaction in the Early Christ-Movement. London, New York: T&T Clark.

Kathy Ehrensperger, (2004) That We May Be Mutually Encouraged: Feminism and the New Perspective on Paul. London,UK, New York: T&T Clark International.

William S. Campbell, (2006) Paul and the Creation of Christian Identity. London, New York: T&T Clark.

Denise Kimber Buell: Ethnic Reasoning

Ethnic reasoning and the dynamic interaction between fixity and fluidity are central elements of the identity forming program of the early ‘church’. Denise Kimber Buell, while writing primarily about the later first through early third centuries, argues that early Christian texts used ethnic categories in forming their identity. It should be noted that most of the texts studied by Buell are from an era later than 1 Corinthians (my area of research). However, from a methodological standpoint much of her framework may be applied to the earliest Pauline communities throughout the Roman empire, as long as one does not read back into Paul’s writings the ethnic argumentation of later writers. Ethnic reasoning is a discursive strategy within early texts which defines ‘ethnicity through religious practices, viewing ethnicity as mutable even if “real”, universalizing ethnicity and religion, and using ethnic ideas as polemic’ (Buell 2005: 33). Buell understands these later authors to be arguing for a universalistic ‘Christian’ identity. In her earlier writing, she contends that ‘being in Christ’ does not ‘eliminate the other various measures of identity – Judean, Greek, slave, free, male, and female’ (Buell and Hodge 2004: 248). While this appears to argue for the existence of particularistic identity, later she concludes ‘that Paul does’ not ‘envision a new people, distinct from Israel’ (2004: 249). The tension resulting from the application of fixity and fluidity is central to Buell’s work.

Buell’s concept of identity formation occurring on the borders of fluidity and fixity is both a help and a hindrance. She argues that certain boundaries are fixed but that these boundaries may be ritually redrawn or discursively rendered culturally insignificant (2005: 7-10). In this way she has rightly considered the complex interrelationship between the essentialist and constructionist positions of identity formation. There are a few weaknesses with this approach. First, it is not clear what mechanisms trigger the border crossing between fixity and fluidity and what distinguishes identity from other culturally defined categories, such as religion (but see Buell 2005: 10). Second, this framework assumes a type of strategic essentialism while rejecting the possibility of hybrid identity as a viable option to the fluidity and fixity framework.

Buell’s approach seeks to problematize identity concepts based primarily on ethnicity; in this, her work diverges from that of Campbell in two ways. First, she questions readings in which ‘ethnicity is a given, biological category’ (2005: 12) whereas Campbell argues for ‘the continuing importance of primordial dimensions of ethnicity’ (2006: 4). Second, she argues ‘that interpretive frameworks that implicitly or explicitly make race or ethnicity a primary site of difference between Jewishness and Christianness in the ancient world will continue to produce a harmful paradox’ (2005: 12). One could, however, simply argue for a particularistic understanding of early Christ-movement identity in which ethnicity is not obliterated but transformed. Early Christ-movement identity does not need Judaism as a foil or as the object against which to define itself. Ehrensperger notes ‘the interpretation of Scriptures is a crucial issue that we must address in the process of reformulating Christian identity without anti-Judaism’ (2004: 18). This is exactly what Campbell seeks to accomplish; in other words, the recognition of an ethnic component in the formation of early Christ-movement identity does not necessarily have to lead to an ethnoracial universalism such as Buell reconstructs but simply implies that Jews relate to God as Jews while gentiles relate to God as gentiles (Campbell 2006: 127).

References:

Buell, D.K. 2005 Why This New Race: Ethnic Reasoning in Early Christianity (Gender, Theory, and Religion; New York: Columbia University Press).

Buell, D.K. and C.J. Hodge 2004 ‘The Politics of Interpretation: The Rhetoric of Race and Ethnicity in Paul’, JBL 123: 235-251.

Campbell, W.S. 2006 Paul and the Creation of Christian Identity (LNTS, 322; London; T&T Clark).

Ehrensperger, K. 2007 Paul and the Dynamics of Power (LNTS, 325; New York: T&T Clark).

"The Sufferings of Christ Are Abundant in Us: A Narrative Dynamics Investigation of Paul's Sufferings in 2 Corinthians"

Kar Yong Lim, a recent graduate of the University of Wales, Lampeter under the supervision of William S. Campbell and Kathy Ehrensperger (also my supervisors), new book The Sufferings of Christ Are Abundant in Us has been released in the UK by T&T Clark. It is an excellent book that looks at the narrative substructure of 2 Corinthians with regard to suffering. It will be out in the US market around July 2009. If you want to pre-order it through Amazon you can click here.

Kar is a Lecturer in New Testament Studies at Seminari Theoloji Malaysia in Seremban, Malaysia.