Paul s Letter to the Galatians OLOL 13/03/09

Transcription

1 Paul s Letter to the Galatians OLOL 13/03/09 This is our 6 th evening together in The Year of Paul. Sadly, we cannot all be here tonight but as you know, a good number of our members are even now on pilgrimage in Rome with Fr Rob. Lucky people! Tonight we shall look at Paul s letter to the Galatians, the authenticity of which is not disputed. I examined the Sunday Missal, to find out when Galatians is read in the liturgy of the word at Sunday Mass. I found that it is read in year C, on ordinary Sundays 9-14, as you see on your handout. Then, once a year, every year, on January 1 st, the Solemnity of Mary Mother of God. These readings give us in total 35 verses of Galatians, which is 149 verses long. So, at mass, once every three years, we hear just less than one quarter of Paul s letter to the Galatians. Three quarters of his letter is never read out in church on Sundays. In fairness I should point out that for a period of 16 weeks in Year A Romans is read, and during Lent Romans is read in all three years. In Romans Paul develops more fully his earlier thinking in Galatians. In February, Dr Peter Walker took us on a hectic journey around the middle east, tracing Paul s footsteps. I m sure you remember a picture of the forbidding mountain over which Paul had to walk, to reach the inland region of Galatia - a Roman Province in the heart of what is now modern Turkey. Interestingly, not that far from Tarsus, Paul s birthplace. Perhaps Paul had cultural, even emotional, reasons for wanting to go there perhaps he felt a bit more at home, a bit more confident! When did Paul go to Galatia? Luke s account of Paul s mission in the Acts of the Apostles, Acts Ch 13, 14, describes what is called The First Missionary Journey. Saul (sic) and Barnabas sailed to Paphos, on the Cyprus coast, then north by sea to Pamphylia on the mainland coast, then inland, through Perga, to Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe all cities in Southern Galatia. They reached the coast again, sailed for (Syrian) Antioch, where they had an argument about circumcision with some men from Judea (Acts 15, 1-2), who insisted that circumcision was necessary for salvation, as it was the basis of God s covenant with Abraham, and this argument is at the heart of Paul s letter to the Galatians, as we shall see. Next, Paul and Barnabas went to Jerusalem to discuss the matter further, where Paul met Peter, whom he had met at least once before in Jerusalem (Acts 9:28). Out of these discussions came the decision of the Apostles Peter and James, that instead of making things more difficult for (the) pagans (Acts 15:19) pagans were merely to follow certain food Laws and abstain from fornication (Acts 15:29). So, circumcision was not required of gentile converts, and gentile converts need not adhere strictly to every aspect of the Mosaic Law. This decision underpinned the later controversy between Paul and the Jewish proselytisers in Galatia. Paul undertook two further missionary journeys (REF: HANDOUT). On all three Paul travelled through the Galatian cities. After the 2 nd missionary journey, he stayed for 3 years at Ephesus, where he probably wrote Galatians in 57 AD. 1

2 Somehow the Galatians had lost their way, had set Paul s teaching aside. Paul had heard about this and was deeply perturbed by it. He was determined to get them back on track if he could, by re-stating his teaching to them. It becomes clear, on reading the letter to the Galatians, that Paul is trying to summarise his understanding of the new gospel something he would do some time later in much more detail, more formally, and more comprehensively, in his letter to the Romans, which has been called the Mount Everest of the New Testament but climb Mount Galatians first! When reading the letters of St Paul we should remember that they are letters, correspondence. They were not intended as textbooks of dogma but as contacts with communities he had visited (or, for the Romans, that he would shortly visit). So the letters frequently tackle specific issues. Often they are very matter-of-fact as well, for example in 1 Cor 16:19: Aquila and Prisca, with the church that meets at their house, send you their warmest wishes in the Lord. Or Ph 2: 25-6: I send brother Epaphroditus back to you he misses you all and is worried because you heard about his illness. There are many such examples in his letters, showing Paul as truly concerned for the communities he had visited. Being letters, they follow the conventions of the letters of the time, exactly as we do today with our own conventions. When you write a letter, you include the date, your address, and you then address your correspondent with Dear Sir, or Dear Mrs Perkins or Dear Terence, and you open by seeking after the health or wellbeing of your correspondent, signing off with good wishes to your correspondent, and you sign your name. Though not the same, there is a pattern nonetheless, in Paul s letters. I want to read you a short paragraph from Raymond Brown s book An Introduction to the New Testament, at pp : The Hellenistic world has left us many Greek and Latin letters of literary quality, as well as papyrus fragments of thousands of letters from Egypt dealing with the concerns of ordinary life (business, legal matters, friendship, and family). There is a more-or-less standard format detectable in most NT letters. Generally, four parts of the letter are distinguished: (1) Opening formula author s name, addressees, greetings, health-wish; (2) Thanksgiving to God or the Gods for benefits received; (3) Body or message the meat of the letter; and (4) Concluding formula greetings repeated, and (for Paul) often a doxology. Paul s letter to the Galatians follows this formula except in one major respect in all his other letters he includes a thanksgiving. Rm 1:8 I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you 1Cor 1:6 - I never stop thanking God for all the graces you have received through Jesus Christ. 2Cor 1:7 And our hope for you is confident, since we know that, sharing our sufferings, you will also share our consolations. Or Eph 1:16: I have never failed to remember you in my prayers and to thank God for you Or Ph 1:3: I thank my God whenever I think of you Or Col 1:3 We have never failed to remember you in our prayers and to give thanks for you to God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ Or 1Th 1:2 We always mention you in our prayers and thank God for you all. Or 2Th 1:3 - We feel we must be continually thanking God for you, brothers. 2

3 But what do we find in the letter to the Galatians? No such thanksgiving, but an extraordinary outburst, Ga 1:6 I am astonished at the promptness with which you have turned away from the one who called you and have decided to follow a different version of the Good News Paul obviously means serious business here. But what did he actually say? When we read the New Testament we read a text which has been translated into English from Greek. Consider the translation of Ga1: 6 in a number of different Bibles all used by the Catholic Church. REF: handout (2). Later in the letter Ga 3:1 he will say, Are you people in Galatia mad? Has someone put a spell on you, in spite of the plain explanation you have had of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ? What was the situation that worried Paul so much? Apparently, other missionaries had come to Galatia from Jerusalem after Paul, and had preached that unless the Galatians submitted to circumcision and fully submitted to the Law of Moses, they could not consider themselves saved. This had obviously persuaded the Galatians it is easy to see how they could have been swayed by preachers from Jerusalem, claiming to speak for the Apostles and presumably implying that the 12 were a more important authority than Paul, because they had spoken personally with Jesus. Whatever Paul had told the Galatians, he had not told them that gentile converts should be circumcised to be acceptable to the Apostles in Jerusalem. Frustratingly, we only know what the preachers said to the Galatians by working it out from Paul s answers to them in his letter. Perhaps this is why Paul is anxious to establish his authority as an Apostle. This is how he starts the letter: READ Ga 1: 1-5 Not only is Paul an Apostle, he insists, but he was appointed by Jesus Christ in other words he has the same status as the 12 that Christ appointed in Judea. In just two sentences, Paul mentions God the Father three times, and Jesus Christ three times, and reminds everybody at the outset what the Gospel is about. Then Paul goes on to set out the problem: READ Ga 1: 6-10 Those are the words of a truly angry man. Astonishment that they have switched allegiance to a different gospel. Emphasis that there can only be one good news and that is the version Paul gave. Threats of condemnation anathema - to anyone suggesting differently, and Paul doesn t care who up to and including angels! And finally, effectively, I don t care what you think it s God I m trying to please. So how different was the gospel that the Jerusalem preachers were putting about? Interestingly, Paul and the Jerusalem preachers agreed much more than they differed. There were certain issues on which all the early Christians so far as we can tell were in complete agreement: 1) The Story of Israel: All were agreed that the history of Israel as set out in the scriptures - the Old Testament, was the unfolding of God s salvation plan for his chosen people, the Jewish race. Indeed it was because they all so strongly agreed about this that Paul could later in his letter use the story of Abraham to make his points. 3

4 2) Christ died and risen the coming of the Messiah: This was the climax of the salvation story, the incarnation, death and resurrection of Jesus, and of course these were the earth shattering new events which altered forever the old Jewish expectation about The Messiah. The early Christians, who we must remember probably saw themselves as a group of reformed Jews, had been so changed by the good news of Christ died and risen, that for them it was an apocalyptic event (see 3) completing the story of the history of Israel this was where it had all been leading. All believers agreed that Jesus had died and had risen, and was the Messiah. 3) The apocalyptic tradition: This is a less familiar concept to us today we speak in a different language - but it is vital nonetheless. Basically, apocalypse means that which is revealed, (literally taking the lid off ), and the early Christians saw conversion in this light truth was revealed by the power of God s Holy Spirit when they became converts. The Spirit s power made this possible, and they were now living life in the Spirit as a result of their apocalyptic conversion. So why was Paul so worried about this different version of the Good News? We never learn directly what the Jerusalem preachers were preaching - we have to work it out, from St Paul s arguments ( if this is the answer what is the question? ). The differences can be summarised under four headings: 1) Paul s authority comes directly from Christ. So his authority as an Apostle is the equal of any of the 12. As a matter of fact, by that time there was at least one Apostle who had been appointed not directly by Christ but through an election Matthias, replacing Judas Iscariot (Acts 1: 21-26). 2) Which is the true version of the gospel? Was it the version brought to the Galatians, by Paul? Or was it the different version brought into Galatia by the Jerusalem preachers, to which the Galatians seem to have switched? Paul knew that the Gospel he received after his own apocalyptic event on the road to Damascus was the true gospel. He was intent on preserving this true gospel against what he saw as the ill-informed views of the Jerusalem preachers. 3) Is it Faith that brings salvation, or the Law? This question had caused friction between Paul and James, and nearly 1500 years later the same question led to Martin Luther s break from Rome and the start of the Reformation. So it s quite an important question! What was Faith? What was The Law? How did they relate to each other and which took precedence? Paul was in no doubt that Faith took precedence. It s actually just as important a question for us today. We have to ask ourselves is it enough to just keep the rules? To come to mass and communion, and say our prayers, and put money in the plate. Is that enough? Or is there more to living the life of Christ in the Community? 4) The importance of the Cross. Christ s cross was at the centre of Paul s theology, and he wanted to make sure that those who believed were clear about this. Circumcision was at the centre of the theology of the Jerusalem preachers the sign of the old covenant. Paul wanted to break this open and re-affirm Christ s cross to the Galatians. 4

5 So, if these were the issues that Paul addresses in his letter, we can guess intelligently what the Jerusalem preachers must have been saying. First they must have been challenging Paul s authority to say anything at all, after all he was not one of the original 12, nor had he been appointed by them to preach. Second even in the short time since Jesus s death and resurrection, gospel stories were obviously abounding, and the Jerusalem preachers were claiming their version to be the authentic gospel, while Paul claimed his to be. And can we at this point quickly remind ourselves that by gospel at that time was not meant Matthew Mark Luke and John, as today the 4 gospels hadn t yet been written! Third, clearly a considerable argument was raging among at least some of the early Christians, about whether it was sufficient for salvation to have received Faith, or whether it was also necessary, having received the Spirit, to continue to follow the old Mosaic Law. Fourth, the Jerusalem preachers insisted that gentile converts should be circumcised, following the old Law. (But it wasn t the old law to them it was the universal law of Moses.) This leads us to a fascinating aspect of Galatians Paul s apologia. Paul sets out his apologia his life story. Ga1: 11 to Ga2: 14 is his account of his life and his experiences, and gives more detail than Paul offered about himself in any other manuscripts. Paul s biography in Galatians does not always line up exactly with the events described in Acts, details of which Luke presumably learned from Paul himself, with whom Luke travelled on the third missionary journey. Paul starts the apologia with his earlier life as a persecutor of God s church (1: 13), and there is a clue at (1: 14) about his strict Pharisaic attitude how enthusiastic I was for the traditions of my ancestors (the Law). He next describes his conversion, (1: 15 1: 16), and what happened after that 1: 17 1: 18); he tells how after 3 years he went to Jerusalem and met Peter and James but not the other Apostles (1:19 1: 21); he speaks of his early travels, and of how people were amazed by his conversion (1: 22-1: 24). He then jumps ahead 14 years (it may be 11), to the great meeting in Jerusalem, where Titus (a gentile convert) was not obliged to be circumcised (2: 4) another clue about the Law. He tells how he discussed his preaching with the Apostles, how they agreed with him that he was teaching the true Gospel to the gentiles, and that they endorsed his work (2: 7 2: 10). He moves ahead now, to the meeting at Syrian Antioch, where he argued with Peter (2: 11 2: 14) and tells how he remonstrated with Peter for his inconsistency. Finally, (2: 15 2: 21) he summarises, in a very difficult passage, his own account of the gospel I live now not with my own life but with the life of Christ who lives in me. (2: 20), and then If the Law can justify us, there is no point in the death of Christ. (2: 23). I think there is an interesting psychological point hiding in all this. We tend to think of Ss Peter & Paul as a kind of double act, founding Christianity. In fact, so far as we know, they met for the first time in Jerusalem when Paul visited 3 years after his conversion, next at Antioch, and then again in Jerusalem for the great conference of AD 49. And that seems to be it, although it is of course feasible that they might have been in contact when both were in Rome. But that would have been after the Galatians crisis. I suspect that Paul and Peter didn t actually know 5

6 each other very well personally at all, and Paul can hardly have known any others of the 12 apart from James. Hardly surprising when you consider Paul s travels and the distances he lived at. Understandable that those in Jerusalem must have asked who Paul thought he was, and how he could justify his preaching about the Lord. No wonder they might have felt they needed to shepherd the Galatians back to the true way! So we reach Chapters 3 and 4 of Galatians, where Paul makes 6 arguments to convince the Galatians about the true gospel. We should not think of the word argument in the sense of premise and conclusion or logic, but of rhetorical persuasion: First argument (Ga 3: 1-5). How had the Galatians at conversion received the Holy Spirit? Through faith, not by rigidly keeping the law. Why did they now want to revert to the restrictions that the Law would impose? Second argument (Ga 3: 6-14). Paul quotes Gen 6: 15: Abraham put his Faith in God, who counted him as having been justified. So, argues Paul, it was Abraham s Faith that pleased God. He then quotes Gen 12: 3, where God says to Abraham in you all the pagans will be blessed, and explains that this means, those who rely on Faith receive the same blessing as Abraham, the man of Faith. (An aside here Dt 21: 23 hanging = cursed. What was the high priest doing? He thought he was airbrushing Jesus out of existence.) Third argument (Ga 3: 15-22). Now Paul introduces a legalistic argument If a will has been drawn up in due form, no one is allowed to disregard it or add to it. But God s will had been expressed to Abraham four hundred and thirty years before the Mosaic Law was written! In other words salvation does not come to us as our right, through a legal process, but as the result of God s promise to Abraham, a promise about Faith, not the Law. Fourth argument (Ga 3: 23-4:11). A very famous passage containing some of Paul s most inspiring words. Paul argues the difference between an heir (with legalistic rights, but shackled by the law) and a son (who has received the Spirit which cries out Abba, Father ). So, by virtue of redemption through Christ, God s promise is fulfilled and we are God s sons, a free gift of the Spirit, through no merit of our own. Why on earth, then, should we want to hang on to the law? Fifth argument (Ga 4: 12-20). Paul now makes a personal plea. He had been ill when staying with them. They had looked after him, they knew him. How could they doubt him? Now he must persuade them of the true good news all over again. Sixth argument (Ga 4: 21-31). Paul uses the story of Abraham to develop an allegory about the two wives Hagar and Sarah. It is not easy to follow. Hagar s child, Ishmael, had been born from normal (biological) causes, and his descendants were the pagans the gentiles. Sarah s child, Isaac, had been born as a result of God s promise to Sarah when she was well past childbearing age, 90+ years old. So Isaac was the child of god s promise, and Isaac s descendants were God s chosen people, the Jewish race. Hagar, the slave woman, represents 6

7 the earthly Jerusalem and the enslaving old covenant. Sarah, the free woman, represents the heavenly Jerusalem, and the freedom given by God s promise to Abraham. Chapter 5 begins the third part of Paul s letter, and it might be useful to remind ourselves that the original letter was not divided into chapters and verses. That convention was only introduced a few hundred years ago, to make the text easier to follow and to refer to. Originally, the letter would have just been continuous writing on a scroll. And with the opening of Chapter 5 we read Paul s exhortation : Ga 5: Live the life of the spirit! Be free! That is what Christ s saving gift of faith is! You don t need circumcision! But what did Paul mean? At the time, the early Christians recognised the circumcised and the uncircumcised to mean the Jews and the gentiles. So Paul is really saying don t be shackled, held down, restricted, enslaved, by the law. The Law has no power to save you all it can do is tell you when you are going wrong, how you are going wrong, but not how to put it right. The Law is powerless to save you. Ga 5: What does Paul mean by life in the spirit? He lists 15 kinds of behaviour (Ga 5: 19-20) which are born out of selfishness, and which oppose the spirit then, famously, he lists the fruits of the Holy Spirit (Ga 5: 22) and shows how living by these frees us from the law, and draws us into the life of the Spirit. You cannot belong to Christ Jesus unless you crucify all self-indulgent passions and desires. Since the Spirit is our life, let us be directed by the Spirit. (Ga 5: 24-25) The main arguments of the letter are now concluded. It ends with Chapter 6, which gives further advice about how to behave, how to live the life of the Spirit, and this is interesting because (to me) it reads almost as though Paul had forgotten the anger he expressed at the start of Chapter 1 and again at the start of Chapter 3. There is much more affection in the final Chapter, as though Paul were speaking to his children. But one final sting remains in the tail of the letter. At Ga 6:11 he writes Take good note of what I am adding in my own handwriting and in big letters. And at Ga 6; 12, (paraphrase) The Jerusalem preachers are only trying to force you to conform to the Law so that they can boast about it. And then, at Ga 6: 15 16, just to make sure they do get it; It does not matter if a person is circumcised or not; what matters is for him to become an altogether new creature. Peace and mercy to all who follow this rule, who form the Israel of God. Paul clearly means to contrast The Israel of God the Israel of the promise with The Israel of the Law the Israel of slavery. And so we reach the end of Paul s letter. No matter how many times you read it, you can simply never exhaust its riches. Reading it is a true blessing. I wish you all a lifetime of joy with this wonderful text. JM/SR 12/3/20 (4000+ wds) 7