Ecclesial Solidarity in the Pauline Corpus. James T. Hughes

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ MacDonald then develops a case for three periods of development in the Pauline corpus, from the community-building institutionalization of Paul’s letters, through the community-stabilizing institution of Colossians and Ephesians, to the community-protecting institutionalization of the Pastoral Epistles.33 In arguing for development, MacDonald argues for changes to attitudes to the world, ministry, ritual, and belief: so, for example, she sees in the Household Codes of Colossians and Ephesians the emergence of stabilization of relationships within and outside the church,34 with a greater focus on established authority structures,35 and the cosmological language of Ephesians and Colossians is seen as bolstering the ongoing continuity of the church and of existing relationships, with again a focus on authority.36

      MacDonald’s analysis presents two issues for this study. The first relates to development and authorship: how should the Pauline corpus be approached when looking at interchurch relations? This will be examined below. The second issue is that the arguments about development tend to move the discussion of ἐκκλησία in the Pauline corpus away from interchurch relationships. That can be seen from the topics MacDonald discusses: they are about the internal dynamics of the church, or the relationship between the church and the world. Thus, whilst questions of development present important methodological issues for this study, they have not contributed much to our understanding of the practical realities of interchurch solidarity.

Fifth, there is a practical neglect of interchurch relationships because of a lack of clarity in determining terminology. The understanding of “church” in the New Testament is not limited to understanding the meaning of ἐκκλησία, and within scholarly literature there is a concern to relate ἐκκλησία to other images of the church, principally the church as a body,37 as a bride,38 as a building,39 and as the people of God.40 However, there is a lack of agreement over the relationship between the images.

Many view the body of Christ as the principal image.41 This again promotes a discussion of the priority of the local, the worldwide, or universal,42 and introduces a host of theological issues and problems relating to origins, anthropology, and imagery.43 Others begin with the image of the people of God, and here the relationship between the local and the “whole” becomes blurred. So, for example, Brower begins with the global “community of God’s holy people,”44 but focuses on how Paul deals with particular communities. In commenting on 2 Thessalonians 2:13, he identifies Paul’s converts as “part of God’s elect people, part of God’s holy people,”45 but the application of this is only to holiness within the community.46 Harrington discusses the people of God, taking Galatians 3:29 as his key Pauline text;47 and focuses on the development of the people-of-God idea through the Bible, and on the importance of unity as an implication of Galatians 3:29.48 There is little here on how unity is to be understood or expressed, or on the interaction between the local and the “whole.”49 These studies highlight areas for examination, but also the need for clarity on interchurch solidarity.

      Interchurch relationships in the Pauline corpus are then a neglected area of study. In examining ecclesial solidarity, this neglect needs to be addressed. In addition, the foregoing discussion has highlighted a number of points for clarification. I have already highlighted the need for a thorough examination of the meaning of ἐκκλησία, which will begin in chapter 2. In the section below on authorship, I will consider some of the issues raised by the idea of development. Finally, there is a need to establish what will be studied in examining ecclesial solidarity: both in terms of the relationship between ἐκκλησία and other imagery used for the church, but also any other areas that will contribute to our understanding of ecclesial solidarity in the Pauline corpus. It is this issue which I will now address.

      Intra- and Interchurch Solidarity

In examining what is meant by solidarity, and how it will be examined, I will first interact with the work of three scholars: Horrell, Trebilco, and Meeks,50 who, whilst approaching issues of early Christian51 identity in slightly different ways, all show the kind of material which might be examined and illuminate the direction I will take in this study.

While Meeks’s work on the social world of the apostle Paul is now thirty years old, it remains a foundational text for the study of the social world of Paul. Meeks sets out to ask questions about how the early Christian movement worked, to look at the environment of early Christian groups and “the world as they perceived it and to which they gave form and significance through their special language and other meaningful actions.”52 Meeks sets Pauline Christianity within its urban, social, and economic context,53 before examining the question of “What makes a group a group?”54 Here Meeks notes similarities and differences between the ἐκκλησία and other groups,55 before examining the language of belonging, separation, and boundary,56 to show how early Christians regarded their own groups. Meeks suggests several useful avenues of inquiry for this investigation. First, some of the material he investigates under the headings of language of belonging and language of separation will be investigated here. Second, Meeks argues that one of the peculiar features of the early Christian groups was “the way in which the intimate, close-knit life of the local groups was seen to be simultaneously part of a much larger, indeed ultimately worldwide, movement or entity.”57 Here Meeks highlights the peculiar way in which the early Christians used ἐκκλησία, the movement of letters, leaders, and messengers between churches, traditions of hospitality, and economic support, particularly the Jerusalem collection.58

David Horrell has written extensively on the issue of corporate solidarity. In his 2005 monograph “Solidary and Difference,” he examines various ways in which Paul seeks to promote corporate solidarity in Christ. Horrell focuses on reading Paul’s ethics, particularly in relation to liberal and communitarian approaches to ethics59; nevertheless, his examination of solidarity yields a number of potentially fruitful lines of enquiry. Horrell focuses first on the construction of community, examining baptism and the Lord’s Supper, the language of brotherhood, appeals for unity by Paul (particularly in 1 Corinthians 1–4), and the language of the body,60 to show how “the first and most fundamental moral norm in Pauline ethics is that of corporate solidarity.”СКАЧАТЬ