Showing posts with label rhetoric. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rhetoric. Show all posts

Friday, July 18, 2014

Forthcoming Article on Paul and Rhetoric

I just received word that an article of mine will appear in the Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters this fall or early winter. My article "Galatians and the Progymnasmata on Refuting a Law: A Neglected Aspect of Pauline Rhetoric" examines the ancient classroom exercise on how to introduce a law or refute one, and then considers the extent to which Paul utilized the kinds of arguments that this exercise promoted. This is a topic that was originally suggested to me by professor Jerry Neyrey in a doctoral seminar at the University of Notre Dame in 2003 and that I finally began working on a few years ago.  I am grateful to Jerry for the suggestion, and also to David Aune for taking the time to read and comment on a draft of this article. The abstract is below, and when the issue is published I'll post the link.

The structure, flow, and logic of Paul’s argumentation in Galatians continues to be a subject of debate as scholars seek to read Paul’s statements about the law, works of the law, and other aspects of Judaism within a framework which appreciates both the diverse nature of first-century Judaism as well as Paul’s appropriation of his own Jewish heritage. Scholars have also sought to read Paul’s letter to the Galatians in light of first-century Greco-Roman rhetorical strategies and conventions. This essay contributes to these discussions by looking at Galatians from an angle that has not yet been considered: the first-century CE progymnasmata exercise on the introduction and refutation of a law (νόμου εἰσφορά). This specific compositional exercise drew on the skills mastered in earlier exercises as students utilized compositional and rhetorical skills to persuade the reader (an imaginary audience) to enact or abandon a particular law based on the topics of legality, possibility, advantage, and appropriateness. By reading Galatians through the lens of this particular exercise, it is possible to appreciate the extent to which Paul utilized conventional forms of argumentation about the application of existing laws. Such a reading contributes to a thicker description of Paul’s utilization of elements of ancient rhetoric.

Saturday, September 28, 2013

The Earliest Written Example of Interpreting a Pauline Letter

Those of us who find ourselves struggling to draw out the meaning of Paul’s letters may be encouraged to know that the problem of interpreting Paul was an early one. Those familiar with the New Testament likely know the reference in 2 Peter to the challenge of understanding Paul’s letters (2 Pet 3:15-16). But there is an earlier recorded instance of Pauline interpretation. It is found in 1 Cor 5:9-12 where Paul himself realized that he needed to interpret and clarify what he had written previously to the Corinthians:
I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral persons—not at all meaning the immoral of this world, or the greedy and robbers, or idolaters, since you would then need to go out of the world. But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother or sister who is sexually immoral or greedy, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber. Do not even eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging those outside? Is it not those inside that you are to judge? (NRSV)
Margaret M. Mitchell (Dean of the University of Chicago Divinity School), in her Paul, the Corinthians, and the Birth of Christian Hermeneutics (Cambridge University Press, 2010), provides a spectacular reading of this passage within the context of ancient approaches to interpreting texts (see esp. pp. 18-33). Mitchell notes a variety of techniques that Paul used in interpreting his earlier letter, and makes a strong case that Paul’s approach to interpretation followed standard topoi of ancient rhetorical discourse about how to interpret written texts whose meaning may be in question. Drawing on Cicero’s discussions of interpretatio scripti Mitchell suggests that Paul used several common topics, including literal reading, together with an appeal to the intent of the lawgiver (which in this case was Paul).  

Regardless of where Paul learned the techniques, it is clear that Paul addressed three things as he interpreted what he had written earlier: which specific persons were the focus of the prohibition (“not the immoral of this world” but “anyone who bears the name of brother or sister”); what he meant by “not to associate” (he expanded this to include not even eating with such a one); and what the unacceptable behavior was (he expanded the scope to include other attitudes and practices such as being a reviler or a drunkard).

Notice that, though Paul gave a literal interpretation (i.e. according to the letter), he also ruled out certain overly literal readings as being impossible. According to v. 11, Paul noted that if his readers took his earlier statement too literally, then they would have had to go out of the world entirely—a literal impossibility. Further, his rhetorical questions in v. 13 suggest that he expected they already knew that Paul was not one to judge those outside of the faith community. Thus, Paul wanted the Corinthians to interpret what he said in accordance with his intent as the original writer.

In this instance of interpretation, of course, Paul had a significant advantage over us and any other later readers: he himself was the original writer and so he could easily access what the original writer meant to convey. Our task is much harder, but we can be encouraged to know two things:

First, interpretation is inherent in the act of reading. To read is to interpret. Needing to interpret does not necessarily represent a failure in us or in the original text. Interpret, we must.

Second, the difficult process of attending to the spectrum from literal meaning (the letter) to intended meaning (the spirit of the text) is modeled for us by Paul. When we wrestle through this process, we are in the company of great writers and readers of all ages.