PAUL AND THE ROMANS
Romans 1:8-15
I long to see you so that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to make you strong— that is, that you and I may be mutually encouraged by each other's faith (vv 11-12).
Introduction
“Open season on Tomlinson” was the headline in the Sports section of the Union-Tribune on Tuesday, January 22, as critical fans bad-mouthed Tomlinson’s decision not to play injured against the Patriots. That same morning in my reading of Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light, with her Eucharistic or communion meditation in the background, on October 5, 1984, Mother Teresa gave the following instructions to her Missionaries of Charity Sisters,
Let the poor and the people eat you up. . . . Let the people “bite” your smile, your time. You might sometimes prefer not to even look at somebody when you have had some misunderstanding. Then, not only you look, but give a smile. . . . Learn by heart you must let the people eat you up.
The value system of Tomlinson’s critics was not “winning is desirable” or even “winning is important,” but that “winning is everything!” I am proudly grateful that you and I have the privilege week after week of giving our minds and hearts to the study of a document like Paul’s letter to the Romans whose value structure is obviously not that of much of the world of professional sports, but more akin to that of the life-long ministry of Mother Teresa and her Missionaries of Charity—a value structure centered in the death and resurrection of Jesus.
1.
I am proud of Herb. He recently purchased a very thorough and technical commentary on Romans, a $90 commentary, for a mere $50! Robert Jewett, a Nebraska boy (Nebraska Wesleyan University, 1951-1955), authored a commentary on Romans in the Hermeneia Commentary Series that was published in 2007. Robert Jewish was commissioned to write the commentary in 1980 and submitted the manuscript in 2003, a twenty-three year scholarly research and writing project. Robert Smith, PLNU Religion faculty, was with Jewett when he received the letter from Fortress Press inviting him to write the commentary. Jewett said, “This is going to change my life!”
A recent issue of Christian Century contains an extensive review of Jewett’s commentary by Luke Timothy Johnson. Luke Johnson is presently the R. W. Woodruff Professor of New Testament and Christian Origins at Candler School of Theology (Methodist, Emory University) in Atlanta, Georgia. He is a former Benedictine monk who while at Yale University doing his doctorate in New Testament, fell in love with and married in 1974 a divorcee with six children, and then fathering one of his own--going from “enclosure” to “enclosure”! He is reported to have said that his life as a monk prepared him for life as a father of seven.
In his review of Jewett, Johnson acknowledges “what is good and important in a work that culminates a long career devoted to the study of Paul.” As a commentary that “upholds the highest standards of critical scholarship” and “posits a strong thesis that he sustains with impressive clarity throughout,” Jewett’s work is “an important resource.” Referring to the challenging theological commentary on Romans by Karl Barth that appeared 89 years earlier who said that although grammarians and historians can explain the text, “unless they engaged the theological issues that Paul addressed they could not be said to interpret Romans.” Johnson agrees saying that “the issues in the letter are inescapably theological, because they involve the human condition before God: the rebellion of sin, the deception of the law, the grace of God, the death and resurrection of Jesus, the obedience of faith.” From this basic standpoint Johnson evaluates Jewett’s work writing that “Jewett’s relentless application of current preoccupations flattens one of the world’s most powerful religious writings to the level of the banal and reveals how little theological passion and insight are to be found among contemporary New Testament interpreters.” So Johnson’s criticism of Jewett’s work is twofold, one, its lack of passionate theological concern, a judgment that could be made of the whole Hermeneia series, and two, his disappointment in and disagreement with many of the concerns and conclusions of contemporary New Testament scholarship as reflected in Pauline research.
Just how fair or correct Johnson is in his appraisal of Jewett’s massive work, we will not venture to judge, for one’s own point of view about the trends in current Pauline studies is involved. But we refer to all this just to say that whatever else Greathouse (and George Lyons) may or may not have done in his commentary on Romans, he does passionately engage in theological exposition; he goes on from what Jewett has done, and exposes his heart for the gospel from a Wesleyan theological perspective. This we can illustrate by what he writes about verse 5 in the second of his theologically significant assertions in his “From the Text” section on vv 1-7.
2.
5 Through him we received grace and apostleship to call all the Gentiles to faith and obedience for his name's sake. 6 And you also are among those Gentiles who are called to belong to Jesus Christ (1:5).
Second, to obey the gospel requires that believers must live obediently as those who belong to Jesus Christ (vv 5-7). To obey fully means not only to hear, but to hearken to God. It requires "submission" to his lordship and purposes (Fitzmyer 1993, 137). . . .
The intermediate goal of the gospel is ongoing moral transformation into the likeness of Christ—to be saints (v 7). John Wesley calls this process sanctification, by which he means renewal in the image of God (see Col 3:10). Believers as "saints" are not only separated from the rest of humanity; they are also purified.
Since all sin is the erection of self into the end and rule of life, sin is utterly opposed to holiness. God's holiness makes Him intolerant of sin, because sin robs Him of that which His holiness demands. Only the holy are pure, only the pure are holy (Beet 1885, 39).
Purification begins in conversion. John Wesley expected this cleansing to deal with both outward and inward sin (1979, 5:150; commenting on 1 Cor 6:9-11). Conversion purifies from sin as God breaks the rule of sin in the lives of "the saints"—his people. Having received the sanctifying Spirit, they yearn to be cleansed from the root of sin that remains—to be transformed, ruled, renewed, and used unreservedly by God (see 6:13, 19; 12:1-12; 1 Cor 7:1)—to be entirely sanctified (1 Thess 5:23-24).
Wesley was convinced that God justifies us in order to sanctify us (2 Cor 2:17-18). Sanctification begins a lifelong process of transformation, marked by certain specific stages on the way. Wesley often described this process in terms of Gal 5:6—"faith expressing itself through love." In his sermon "On Patience" he describes the distinction between the various phases of the process as ever-increasing degrees of love.
Now finally, we move on in our attention to the text of the letter to the Romans. We are dealing with
I. Letter Prescript (1:1-15) A. The Apostolic Greeting (1:1-7) B. Paul's Interest in the Roman Church (1:8-15) In “Behind the Text” on 1:8-15 the commentary explains the function of these verses in the letter:
The first sentence of an ancient Greek letter, after the salutation, was often of a religious nature, informing the recipients of the writer's prayer to the gods on their behalf. The prayer was usually a thanksgiving (or petition), typically concerned with the recipients' health. . . .
Epistolary thanksgivings in ancient letters also typically serve as a rhetorical exordium. That is, they introduce and anticipate the key concerns that will be developed in the letter. . . .
Since Paul has never been to Rome and had no part in founding the Roman church, his thanksgiving must overcome the barrier of strangeness that separates him from his mostly unknown readers (see ch 16). . . . What many see as a strategy to overcome suspicions is actually a normal feature of ancient rhetoric—establishing one's trustworthy ethos with an audience. Since effective persuasion requires all the rhetorical resources available, ancient authors characteristically appeal to ethos (character), logos (reason), and pathos (emotion) to make their case. Paul is no exception. He is not on the defensive, but on the offensive, as he seeks to persuade the Romans to become partners in the gospel.
As we read 1:8-15, let us observe Paul’s heart in relation to the members of the Church at Rome. 1. Paul's Prayer (1:8-12)
8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is being reported all over the world. 9 God, whom I serve in my spirit in preaching the gospel of his Son, is my witness how constantly I remember you 10 in my prayers at all times; and I pray that now at last by God's will the way may be opened for me to come to you.
11 I long to see you so that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to make you strong— 12 that is, that you and I may be mutually encouraged by each other's faith.
2. Paul’s Plans (1:13-15) 13 I do not want you to be unaware, brothers and sisters, that I planned many times to come to you (but have been prevented from doing so until now) in order that I might have a harvest among you, just as I have had among the other Gentiles. 14 I am obligated both to Greeks and non-Greeks, both to the wise and the foolish. 15 That is why I am so eager to preach the gospel also to you who are in Rome. 1.
What was Paul’s attitude toward the Romans? What do we learn about his apostolic heart? What appears to drive his expected ministry to them? Who is the apostle Paul in these two paragraphs? What kind of a minister was he? What are we to gain from this passage?
2.
Let us pick out two verses, 11-12, and look at them more carefully:
I long to see you so that I may impart to you some spiritual gift (charisma pneumatikon) to make you strong—that is, that you and I may be mutually encouraged by each other's faith.
What is the “some spiritual gift” that he expects to impart to them when he arrives in Rome, a gift he says “to make you strong . . . that you and I may be mutually encouraged by each others faith.” From “In the Text” we read,
The apostle explains the motive of his visit: that [hina] I may impart some spiritual gift (charisma . . . pneumatikon) to make you strong (v 11). Evidently the Romans will miss this spiritual endowment if they remain personally unacquainted with him. Precisely what Paul meant by this charisma may only be guessed from descriptions in his other letters.
Yet Greathouse tentatively follows the suggestion of Karl Barth whom he quotes”
But here, the "particular gift of the Spirit" Paul had in mind is simply the Gospel, which according to i.5 had been entrusted to him. Other men have other gifts. . . . This particular gift, the proclamation of the Gospel, is the gift of the apostolic office bestowed on him (Barth 1959, 18).
If this is what Paul means, he assumes that the Spirit would empower his preaching in Rome so that by hearing the gospel in faith, the Romans would experience the charisma (see Acts 19:1-6; Gal 3:2).
Paul's express reason for desiring to visit the Romans is to make you strong, literally, "for you to be established" (v 11). He does not say, "that I may establish you." The modesty of the passive omits Paul's personal part in the process. He notes later that it is God "who is able to establish you by my gospel and the proclamation of Jesus Christ" (16:25).
To simplify and focus the question, I like to think that at the heart of and as the essence of Paul’s coming will be “the ministry of presence.” Paul’s “ministry of presence” is first the “gift” of his just being there, the gift to them of his personal presence.
Paul’s “ministry of presence” is second a “spiritual” gift, the gift of the Spirit. As one in whom the Holy Spirit lives, when Paul is present the Spirit of Christ is also present touching and talking to those in his presence.
In a talk given in 1989 Mother Teresa said,
Recently, a man met me on the street. He said: “Are you Mother Teresa?” I said, “yes.” He said: “Please send somebody to my house. My wife is half mental and I am half blind. But we are longing to hear the loving sound of a human voice.” They were well-to-do people. They had everything in their home. Yet they were dying of loneliness, dying to hear a loving voice.
As Mother Teresa’s ministry matured among “the poorest of the poor” she began to realize that the greatest poverty is that of being unloved, whether rich or poor. At the beginning of her work she had exhorted her followers to “find Jesus in the dark holes of the slums, in the most pitiful miseries of the poor.” Now, she found Jesus “as well in the loneliness of the well-to-do.”
You and I can be such a “gift.” As bearer of the Spirit of Christ, the very presence of God to be a “spiritual” gift. The “ministry of presence” is open to us all as praying people without exception!
Conclusion
We close with the reflections of William M. Greathouse in “From the Text”:
Those called to full-time professional Christian ministry would do well to emulate the apostle Paul as he reveals his mission-passion in this passage.
His ministry was eucharistic: The thought of standing before the Romans and proclaiming the gospel filled Paul with thanksgiving. He felt compelled to thank God for the privilege and obligation to preach the gospel (see 1 Cor 9:16; 2 Cor 5:14-20). Paul's ministry was sustained through constant prayer.
Not only prayer, but preaching was an integral expression of Paul's worship. Preaching in the power of the Spirit allowed Christ to take human words and communicate through them his living word to the hearts of all who would listen. It is a characteristic Pauline tendency to conceive of acts of mundane service as expressions of worship. Those who occupy the pulpit, as well as those who sit in the pews must get over the notion that worship involves primarily singing praise songs to Jesus.
Paul's was an appropriately contextualized ministry. Despite his Jewish upbringing, his confidence in the power of the gospel allowed him to understand the cultural assumptions of his Gentile audience in order to communicate the good news intelligibly and effectively. He understood his world well enough to speak in categories it understood; and he understood the gospel well enough to communicate it faithfully, without accommodating its truth to the culture in the process.
Here lies the great temptation of the contemporary Church, to overdo one or the other, either not be heard, or lose the message! William M. Greathouse: Outline I. Letter Prescript (1:1-15) A. The Apostolic Greeting (1:1-7) B. Paul's Interest in the Roman Church (1:8-15) 1. Paul's Prayer (1:8-12) 2. Paul’s Plans (1:13-15) II. The Gospel of God's Righteousness (1:16—15:13) The Thesis of the Letter (1:16-17) A. God's Righteousness Needed (1:18—3:20) B. God's Righteousness Provided (3:21—8:39) C. God's Righteousness in History (9:1—11:36) D. God's Righteousness in Practice (12:1—15:13) III. Conclusion: Romans 15:14—16:27 A 1/30/08 Union-Tribune article by staff writer Kevin Acee reports that Deion Sanders (unsurprisingly) and Jim Brown (one of Tomlinson’s idols) were among his critics. An additional MRI on Tomlinson’s left knee indicates that it was further damaged in four snaps he was in the game.
Brian Kolodiejchuk, Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light (New York: Doubleday, 2007), 285. Kolodiejchuk both edited and added commentary to her letters and other material. In the context of our quote he speaks of her “Eucharistic spirituality” as being both mystical and practical. Robert Jewett, Romans: A Commentary, Hermeneia (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007). William M. Greathouse consulted this commentary regularly in his work. I do not own a copy. Robert Jewett was professor of New Testament Interpretation from 1980 to 2000 at Garrett Evangelical Theological Seminary in Chicago, becoming Emeritus after 2000. Since then he has been Guest Professor of New Testament, Wissenschaftlich-Theologisches Seminar, at the University of Heidelberg in Germany. Years later Jewett told Robert Smith that he had spent $20,000 of his own money paying a research assistant. Another time he said, about meeting his self-imposed deadlines, he was in fear of losing his health. On the publication of the commentary he told Robert Smith that had he completed the commentary in the first 12 or 15 years when most of the research was in place, he would have failed to understand the message of Paul and written a far different commentary. It was at that point that he really began to understand the rhetorical structure of the document and redirected his thinking to take seriously the material that was coming out of the discussion of the New Perspective on Paul.
So named when began near the optimistic end of the nineteenth century as it viewed the twentieth.
“Reading Romans,” Christian Century (January 15, 2008), 32-36.
Among those we know who have done graduate work at Emory University are our own Herbert L. Prince, Jerry M. McCant, Michael Lodahl, and Brad Kelly. Kolodiejchuk, Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light, 295-296. The speech was published in The Catholic Reader, October 26, 1980.
Ibid., 297.
5.2.12 DATE \@ "M/d/yyyy" 2/24/2008 TIME \@ "h:mm:ss am/pm" 4:05:04 PM
PAGE 34 Romans 3: February 3, 2008 fgc sdfc c&g