Review of Mark Given's Paul Unbound

Mark D. Given, ed. Paul Unbound: Other Perspectives on the Apostle. Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson Publishers, 2010. Pp. xiv + 210. ISBN: 978-1-59856-324-5. $24.95 paper.

These essays discuss aspects of Pauline studies that are often beyond traditional theological and historical considerations. They are designed to introduce advanced undergraduates, graduate students, and interested laypeople to areas not often covered in standard textbooks and thus serve as a supplement to such works. Mark D. Given begins with an introduction that explains how the myth of Prometheus relates to the perspectives taken in this collection.

            Warren Carter’s essay provides a critical overview of scholarship that focuses on the Roman imperial context. Carter is particularly helpful in seeing the various ways that Paul negotiated the empire. He contends that there is a paradigm shift occurring in this area, though he rightly cautions against an over-correction that leads to a neglect of Paul’s first-century Jewish context. Steven J. Friesen’s chapter reminds Pauline scholars of the economic context of the early Christ-movement. When this is neglected, they provide anachronistic descriptions of the social status of the earliest Christ-followers. He introduces his poverty scale that provides a taxonomy of economic indicators. Using this scale, Friesen finds that the majority of those described in Paul’s letters lived at or around the subsistence level. He then applies his poverty model to Paul’s Jerusalem collection and argues that it functions as an alternative patronage system. Jerry L. Sumney thinks that there is a need for methodological sophistication when it comes to identifying Paul’s opponents. In his essay, he suggests that scholars pay closer attention to the way they employ information from the surrounding culture, so that their reconstructions of Paul’s opponents are anchored in the text rather than an imagined cultural imposition.

            Charles H. Cosgrove’s essay offers a wide-ranging review of studies focused on various aspects of ethnicity in Pauline studies. He finds that Paul was highly interested in ethnic identity, and thinks that the reconciliation of various ethnic groups was part of Paul’s mission (p. 97). Cosgrove’s essay is particularly helpful in understanding the various approaches to the continuation of Jewish and Gentile identity in Christ. A. Andrew Das provides a description of seven pressure points in the debates between the New Perspective on Paul (NPP) and the traditional Lutheran perspective. This essay quickly orients readers to the key areas in question, and Das skillfully weaves into this survey his third-way reading that navigates both perspectives. Mark D. Nanos’ chapter provides a sustained argument for the contention that Paul never left Judaism but remained Torah observant, and that the NPP did not go far enough. This important essay introduces readers to an emerging interpretive perspective often overlooked by Pauline scholars. Deborah Krause outlines feminist perspectives on Paul and contends that the field has shifted from a narrow focus on Paul’s view of women to a broader interest in the contributions of women within the earliest Christ-movement. Jorunn Økland’s work is a particularly good example of this (pp. 167-68). Mark D. Given’s essay provides a brief survey of rhetorical criticism, both traditional and postmodern approaches, and shows how a combination of these can bring interpretive insights to 1 Corinthians.

            Given brings together key perspectives that are quite influential in current Pauline studies, and this book achieves its goal of introducing students to different approaches to Paul. Given recognizes that other perspectives need to be addressed (p. 5), and it is hoped that a follow-up book will address some of those omissions. However, this book is a welcome addition to the field, and will provide students an accessible resource that will allow them to quickly orient themselves to these different perspectives on the Apostle Paul.

Warren Carter: Roman Empire and the NT, Part 3

This is the final part of my extensive review of Warren Carter’s book The Roman Empire and the New Testament: an Essential Guide. Part 1 is available here, whilst part 2 may be located here. Chapter seven, “Economics, Food, and Health,” examines the economic realities and negotiation that occurred within the empire; especially in the areas of food, health, and other daily matters. Roman imperial power was expressed through these rather mundane economic and domestic experiences. Carter’s approach to history “from below” is most clearly seen in this chapter, he notes “economic structures were exploitative and unjust.” (p. 101) This conceptual blend serves as the interpretive framework for Carter’s understanding of how early Christ-followers supported, fed, and cared for themselves and each other. Carter argues that, in Matthew, Jesus is editing the dominant script as it relates to wealth (Matt 19:21-29). James, Carter notes, is writing to “a community experiencing significant economic oppression.” (p. 102) He is writing to them to encourage them to trust God for economic viability in the midst of an oppressive economic system. Carter provides a postcolonial, audience-oriented reading of James (pp. 103-5) that coheres well with the details of the letter. In Revelation, communities of faith are addressed concerning their complicity in sustaining certain aspects of the Roman economic system. Carter comes to this conclusion based on an innertexture element from Rev 18 with Rev 2-3. Food is discussed next and Carter evaluates how meals and domestic space supported Roman imperial ideology: “[f]ood was about power.” (p. 109) When the New Testament discusses food, a discourse of power is operative. Food shortages created political problems and the ability to navigate food shortages became a vital political skill. Carter alludes to the possibility that “the impending crisis” in 1 Cor 7:26 referred “to a food shortage.” (p. 111) Winter and Blue have argued for this as well, and there is no reason to doubt that this refers to the famine of A.D. 51. Carter concludes with a short section on health in the empire and notes the prevalence of sickness in the empire argues for understanding “Jesus’ healings and exorcisms” as being “direct confrontations with the effects of Roman rule.” (p. 117) The New Testament writers were aware of the difficulties of daily life in the Roman Empire; however, they were also well aware that the power of the Gospel offered assistance with those same difficulties. Carter’s work in this chapter brings this fact into relief.

Chapter eight, “Further Dynamics of Resistance,” explores three forms of resistance to the Roman Empire as seen in the New Testament: “imagining Rome’s violent overthrow, employing disguised and ambiguous protest, and using flattery.” (p. 120) Earliest Christianity followed Jesus’ command concerning non-violence towards the Romans (e.g., Matt 26:52-53; John 18:36); however, their rhetorical vision still envisioned such a scenario. Paul, in 1 Cor 15:24 argued that God will destroy all empires; this is however, intramural rhetoric. Carter notes “Matthew envisions Rome’s overthrow in 24:27-31 at the return of Jesus.” (p. 122) One of Carter’s most interesting interpretive choices, which is also in his JBL article mentioned in post 1, is that “vultures” translated in v. 28 should be translated as “eagles” and that “Jesus’ coming is ‘lights-out’ time for Rome.” (p. 123) Carter sees similar imagery at work in Revelation and concludes “[t]hese imaginings are the in-group protests of an alternative community, directed against Rome but not made public or expressed openly to Rome.” (p. 128) Carter suggests the earliest Christians also participated in disguised or indirect protest. While it is possible that these protests are there, the nature of their ambiguity and the lack of an objective standard by which to discern their presence require a cautious approach to uncovering this type of protest. Carter’s final approach to resistance focuses on the rhetoric of flattery in Rom 13:1-7. Carter’s solution is somewhat unsatisfying and the existence of a “hidden transcript” in Rom 13:1-7 better explains the nature of Paul’s exceptional rhetoric in these verses. Carter’s work in this chapter provides an insightful introduction into the nature of protestation in antiquity. The existence of accommodation and resistance simultaneously within a community of Christ-followers suggest there is more work to be done in this important area.

Carter’s purpose is to show the reader how early Christians and New Testament writers negotiated the Roman Empire and the chapters in the book are structured around those imperial realities (p. x). This volume fulfills that purpose and meets a vital need for those studying or teaching the New Testament and would serve as an excellent undergraduate textbook as well as for the general public. The Roman Empire is normally treated as part of a cursory survey of background material when discussing the various New Testament communities and their texts. Carter’s work demonstrates that such an approach is unsatisfactory and leads to missing key interpretive frameworks. The presence of the Roman Empire is not a background issue; it is a foreground issue, one that must be engaged for a proper understanding of New Testament texts.

A number of strengths and weaknesses have been mentioned throughout this review; however, one more requires attention. Carter seeks to establish the Roman Empire as the context in which the New Testament unfolds. This fact is indisputable; however, Carter’s work does not fully show that empire-focused questions were central in the mind of the New Testament authors or their auditors. This criticism is often raised when scholars engage in sustained imperial-contextual analysis of the New Testament. Carter is sensitive to this criticism and makes an effort to address theological concerns throughout the book. James Dunn, for example, recognizes imperial-contextual analysis as interesting but secondary to the theological concerns of the authors and their auditors. While Dunn’s criticism is valid, he dismisses imperial-contextual analysis too quickly. Theological concerns in the New Testament; however, are also political concerns, the lack of evidence for sustained discourse concerning the empire is only an argument from silence and Carter’s book while susceptible to these same criticisms does make efforts to correct this short-coming within imperial-contextual studies. Criticisms of Carter’s work are sometimes subsumed under a broader criticism of Richard Horsley’s work; while there are significant similarities between the work of Carter and Horsley, especially in the area of contemporary contextualization of imperial-contextual analysis (e.g., the impact of the United States as an empire). Carter’s work does not establish the same binary relationship between earliest Christianity that is evident in Horsley’s work. He presents a more nuanced approach, one in which the degree of continuity with Roman imperial ideology is given its full textual consideration. This limits some of the broad-ranging conclusions evident in Horsley’s work, however, it makes the conclusions that Carter does reach more plausible. This scholarly restraint and circumspection produces a highly accessible introduction to the Roman Empire during the New Testament times and is recommended for students in biblical, theological, and religious studies.

Part 3 of 3.

References:

Carter, Warren. 2003. "Are There Imperial Texts in the Class? Intertextual Eagles and Matthean Eschatology As "Lights Out" Time for Imperial Rome (Matthew 24:27-31)". Journal of Biblical Literature. 122, no. 3: 467.

Carter, Warren. The Roman Empire and the New Testament: An Essential Guide. Abingdon essential guides. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2006.

Warren Carter: Roman Empire and the NT, Part 2

This post continues the review of Warren Carter's Roman Empire and the New Testament which I began in the previous post. Chapter three, “Ruling Faces of the Empire: Encountering Imperial Officials,” describes the nature of the interaction of these early Christ-followers with the various Roman imperial ruling authorities: “emperors, client kings, governors, and soldiers.” (p. 28) Carter looks at seven different references in the New Testament to the emperor. His interpretation of “pay back to Caesar the things of Caesar and to God the things of God” (Mark 12:13-17) reveals how a postcolonial, audience-oriented approach to the text can provide brilliant interpretive insights. Carter detects an “unofficial transcript” at work in Jesus’ subversive response to the ruling elites aligned with Rome and argues that “Jesus’ instruction…is a dignity-restoring act of resistance that recognizes God’s all-encompassing claim.” (p. 29) The client kings are seen as unsympathetic figures in the New Testament narrative, the Herodian dynasty, behaving as unscrupulous provincial elites actively resisting God’s work in Judea and Galilee (e.g., Matt 2; Mark 6:14-28; Acts 12:1-5). Jesus, on the other hand, “is presented as a king who represents God’s just and triumphant purposes.” (p. 37) Roman governors were another face of the empire; these individuals were appointed by the emperor or the senate and served as functionaries to assure the proper collection of taxes and the extension of the Roman rule of law throughout the provinces. Carter builds on his earlier work on Pilate, mentioned above, to provide an illustration of the nature of the interaction of a governor over those whom he ruled (Matt 27:11-26). The soldiers were the face of the empire that most people living under the Roman Empire encountered. Carter concludes this chapter with a disconcerting postcolonial insight concerning the pervasiveness of military imagery in early Christian discourse even though Jesus’ instructions forbade the use of violence (e.g., Matt 5:41; 26:53; John 18:36).

Chapter four, “Spaces of Empire: Urban and Rural Areas,” identifies the countryside and cities as spaces of Roman dominance and as places in which negotiation of empire often occurred. This chapter provides an excellent example of the application of critical spatial theory as practiced by Henri Lefebvre and Edward Soja. Space is not an empty partner in the construction and negotiation of identity and Carter looks at how the embedded power discourses were embodied in the material structures of empire. He evaluates how power discourse occurred within the nexus of urban-rural topography and applies these insights to the Gospel communities, the Pauline communities, and the cities in Revelation. Paul’s rhetorical vision for group formation was impacted by the material structures of empire and Carter notes it is not clear if his communities agreed with his vision for communal formation “or preferred other ways of negotiation.” (p. 63)

Chapter five, “Temples and “Religious”/Political Personnel,” continues the critical spatial analysis that was begun in the previous chapter, this time focusing on ritual space, temples, and the nature of Roman religion. Carter begins by correcting the faulty assumption that a public/private binary existed in Roman antiquity. Roman imperial religion was political, corporate, and public. Temples were not seen as isolated religious institutions. They reinforced Roman imperial propaganda, established civic identity, and were tools of political, economic, and social exploitation. Carter evaluates the role that Roman imperial ideology played in the Jerusalem Temple noting Josephus’ remark that "[s]acrifices were offered in the temple for but not to the emperor and Rome" (Josephus, JW 2.416 [emphasis original]). (p. 66) This serves as a good example of the negotiation necessary to maintain Judean identity in the midst of Roman domination. Jesus’ conflicts and teaching concerning the Jerusalem Temple are surveyed and Carter shows how the early Christ-followers experiences, as described in Acts, with the Jerusalem Temple cohered with that of Jesus. Paul’s negotiation of ritual space is evaluated in the context of the temple of Artemis in Ephesus. This section is vital to understanding the nature of civic religion in the Roman east and provides significant insight into the way in which nested-identities were negotiated within the Roman Empire. Carter describes the results of this negotiation suggesting “they [early Christians] must live in this multireligious world, finding their own faithful place in it without necessarily expecting to overturn its civic and imperial structures.” (p. 77) Carter then focuses on the ritual observances within the imperial cult throughout the Roman Empire and discusses the nature of negotiation as seen in 1 Peter and Revelation. Roman religious discourse required significant negotiation within earliest Christianity. Carter, in this chapter, notes three predominate ways in which this negotiation with Roman religion occurred: some early Christ-followers chose opposition, some accommodation, and others possible active participation.

Chapter six, “Imperial Theology: A Clash of Theological and Societal Claims,” discusses the nature of competing claims for supremacy between the propaganda of Roman imperial theology and the claims about God and Jesus. Carter provides an excellent introduction to Roman imperial theology relying, for the first time in this book, on a significant amount of primary sources (e.g. Virgil’s Aeneid, Seneca’s Clem., Tacitus’ Ann., Suetonius’ Vespasian, Statius’ Silvae, and Pliny’s Pan.) these references provide the readers with a sense of the content of Roman imperial theology and is one of the strengths of this book. Rome claimed divine sanction for its empire but the New Testament, Carter points out, directly disputes this central claim (e.g., Rom 1:18-32; 1 Cor 2:8; 8:6). Much of the vocabulary of early Christian discourse contained intertextual elements with Roman imperial vocabulary (e.g., good news, salvation, righteousness, and faith) and Carter notes there is evidence of subversion in some of this discourse (e.g., Rom 13:1-7). (p. 92) Carter then summarizes similar evidence in the Gospels noting that Jesus serves as God’s agent and that his followers are to continue to follow his commands until he returns. This language resonated with Roman imperial ideology and Carter makes a strong case for the need to foreground the political implications of early Christian discourse.

This concludes part 2 of 3.

Reference:

The Roman Empire and the New Testament: an Essential Guide. By Warren Carter. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2006, 148 pp., $16.00, paperback.

Warren Carter: Roman Empire and the NT, Part 1

The Roman Empire and the New Testament: an Essential Guide. By Warren Carter. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2006, 148 pp., $16.00, paperback.

Warren Carter teaches at Brite Divinity School. He is one of the leading scholars in the field of imperial-contextual analysis of the New Testament and is an excellent choice for this highly accessible yet substantial introduction to the impact the Roman Empire had on the New Testament. His recent work has focused on the process of interaction between the New Testament communities and the dominant values of Roman imperial ideology. His recent works include: Matthew and Empire: Initial Explorations (Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 2001); Pontius Pilate: Portraits of a Roman Governor (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press/Michael Glazier, 2003); John and Empire: Initial Explorations (Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 2007); “Are There Imperial Texts in the Class? Intertextual Eagles and Matthean Eschatology as ‘Lights Out’ Time for Imperial Rome (Matthew 24:27-31),” JBL 122 (2003), 467-87; “Proclaiming (in/against) Empire Then and Now,” Word and World 25 (2005), 149-58; and “Matthew and Empire,” Union Seminary Quarterly Review 59 (2005), 86-92. Carter’s work is situated within the postcolonial approach to New Testament studies which seeks to read the texts “from below.” His approach also draws upon audience-oriented criticism which seeks to understand how texts were received as they were interpreted by their audience. He skillfully combines these two approaches in this work. Though most of Carter’s work has focused on the Gospel of Matthew, his mastery of the broader New Testament corpus is evident in The Roman Empire and the New Testament.

Chapter one, “The Roman Imperial World,” provides an introductory description of the structure of the Roman imperial system. Carter argues the Roman Empire is ever present in the New Testament and that the New Testament writers are not unified in their approach or evaluation of the empire. He also notes two realities that hinder our understanding of the presence of the empire in the New Testament: the unification of religion and politics in the empire and a general lack of knowledge about the Roman world. The Roman Empire was thoroughly hierarchical and male-dominated. The emperors required military support and alliances with the ruling elites to maintain power. The imperial cult served to further stratify the society and provide a sense of divine approval on the reign of the emperor. Carter notes how elite values supported their hegemonic conception of ruling power and “hierarchical societal structure.” (p. 10) The negotiation necessary to survive as a nonelite was significant and various coping mechanisms emerged, one in particular: “hidden transcripts” (p. 12) were vital to a non-violent form of protest to the inequalities leveled against the well over 90% of the population that were part of the nonelites. Rigid hierarchy and economic disparity were two keys aspects of the structure of the Roman Empire during the Principate.

Chapter two, “Evaluating Rome’s Empire,” looks at how some of the New Testament writers evaluated the Roman imperial system. Carter provides a much needed corrective to the tendency within New Testament studies to homogenize the integration and evaluation of the empire by New Testament texts. There is actually a variegated approach to empire, distinctive of the various authors and the parts of the empire in which their recipients dwelt. Carter notes however there is consistency of evaluations concerning Rome “in relation to God’s life-giving purposes.” (p. 16) This is an important component of Carter’s survey in that imperial-contextual analysis of the New Testament is often somewhat wrongly accused of minimizing theological concerns. The first approach to evaluation Carter suggests is “the empire is of the devil.” (p. 16) This approach understands the Roman Empire as part of the cosmic struggle between good and evil and is seen in the Gospels (e.g., Luke 4:1-13, Jesus’ temptation; Mark 5:1-20, the demon named “Legion”) and the book of Revelation (e.g., Rev 12-13). This evaluation understands no redeeming value in the Roman imperial system. The second approach is “Rome’s world is under judgment.” (p. 18) This is an apocalyptic framework in which the earthly rule of Rome is understood to be passing away (e.g., 1 Cor 2:6-8). The next two approaches foreground the concept of practices that subvert the empire through “acts of transformation” and the establishment of “alternative communities.” (p. 20) These alternative communities may develop alternative economic structures (1 Cor 16:1-4), power relations (Matt 20:24-28), and transformation of the unjust political structures within the empire (Luke 4:18-19a). A final approach emphasizes “submitting to, praying for, and honoring the emperor.” (p. 22) Carter understands this approach as an accommodation to empire (e.g., 1 Pet 2:13-17) and leaves open the possibility “that 1 Peter is encouraging Christian participation in honoring the emperor…while recognizing that their real commitment is to Christ.” (p. 23) Carter weaves an intricate tapestry of strategies of “survival, protest, accommodation, and imitation” within earliest Christianity concerning the Roman Empire and provides a plausible reconstruction of the nature of the negotiation that was occurring within nascent Christian communities.

This is part 1 of 3.

See also:

Carter, Warren. Matthew and the Margins: A Sociopolitical and Religious Reading. London ; New York: T & T Clark, 2004.